PDA

View Full Version : A Question on Caste



sunyata07
14 October 2009, 03:23 PM
Namaste everybody,

This was a post for the Hot Topics forum, but I eventually reconsidered and decided I had insufficient knowledge of this issue on my part to post it in the said forum. This is as much a thread of inquiry of fact as it is your own personal opinion. If you have something of your own to share, please do, because I am interested in hearing from all sides.

I have a beginner's understanding of the caste system, so in advance, please forgive my lack of knowledge.

I recently expressed my (positive) opinion about a certain spiritual teacher on another discussion board, only to have someone come along and reply back: "She is not a Brahmin... why then do you respect a Shudra lady?" In those words. I'm not sure if this comment was made to me to incite a certain response, because I honestly don't know what to make of it. By that remark, are people of Shudra caste not to be respected in general? Or was it meant in context to this individual being a spiritual leader? Being inexperienced with attitudes to different castes within the system, it's hard for me to see this as being either a rather caustic remark made by a sceptic or a genuine expression of incredulity at my admiring this teacher.

What I want to know is: Is it a prerequisite for one to be from a Brahmin background to achieve recognition of spiritual enlightenment? I'm not being rhetorical here, I am genuinely inquiring about the nature of this self-realisation process. I know the Brahmin caste is traditionally made up of the holy men, priests and scholars, but does this hold universally across the caste system to this date? I made my opinions on this teacher based on her philosophy and her teachings which emphasised love, kindness and charity, not on her socioeconomic background. Whether or not she is truly and fully self-realised, from a non-religious perspective I consider her a very kind and loving person. This may be Western naivety on my part, but I see one's ethnic and social origins as being (ultimately) irrelevant with respect to spiritual awakening.

Can anyone share with me what they know of the general consensus about spiritual teachers? Or their own opinions of this matter?

Peace

Eastern Mind
14 October 2009, 04:12 PM
Namaste: My Guru didn't believe in caste, and neither do I. Having said that, I have met many people who remain, from childhood conditioning, or choice, quite focused on caste. True also in the west. I face it as discrimination, or lack of understanding in several ways. Not only as a white (outcast) in some temple communities, but also in the west itself as class. Because I am a teacher, and am now semi-retired but look for less stressful jobs, some days I feel like not putting 'teacher' on my resume. Others assume I will be some pompous ____ always correcting their spelling or something like that. Respect of individual (caste if you must) should be determined by character and actions alone.

Sunyata: It's really too bad this happens, I feel the people who said what they said in condescending way are probably missing out on valid teachings. (I think Satay might ban such from these forums) We have a board member on a certain temple in my city that makes such a fuss about it that certain teachers (gurus) are simply not welcome in 'her' temple. How this person arrived at this level of hatred when surrounded by the beauty of scriptures and fellow Hindus is totally beyond my ability to understand. (Well, actually, she's just an immature soul needing some more evolution.) Its sad, but true. Fortunately, these types, generally speaking are from an older generation, and are being slowly replaced by more loving tolerant leaders.

Aum Namasivaya

devotee
14 October 2009, 09:47 PM
Namaste Sunyata,



I recently expressed my (positive) opinion about a certain spiritual teacher on another discussion board, only to have someone come along and reply back: "She is not a Brahmin... why then do you respect a Shudra lady?" In those words. I'm not sure if this comment was made to me to incite a certain response, because I honestly don't know what to make of it. By that remark, are people of Shudra caste not to be respected in general? Or was it meant in context to this individual being a spiritual leader?

It is said that God doesn't give everything to anyone. There is always some balancing act. The Hindus had one of the oldest & richest culture to be proud of .... they were living in a country which was given the best of seasons, fertile land etc. & that land was known as golden bird (for which many of expeditions took place) ... they had the spiritual knowledge which was unparalleled. So, to balance all these, God also gave them the scourge of Casteism in their minds !

My dear friend, there have been many saints who were born/raised in so called lower castes like Maharishi Parashar, Ved VyAs, Mahatma Vidur, Kabir, Sant Ravidas etc. etc. None of the incarnation of God was in Brahmin caste. Swami Vivekananda, Maharishi Yogananda & Maharishi Mahesh Yogi were Kayastha.

The most of the sufferings within Hindu Scoiety, imho, is due to this scourge of Casteism. The Government policy has only divide people more on caste lines in India than doing any good.


What I want to know is: Is it a prerequisite for one to be from a Brahmin background to achieve recognition of spiritual enlightenment?

Absolutely not ! If you have any doubts on what I say, please read VajrashUchikA Upanishad of SAm Veda.

I hope it helps. :)

OM

sunyata07
15 October 2009, 03:14 PM
Thank you for your responses. It may sound silly that I did not know what the majority of opinions might have been on this board, but it's a comfort to read these sane answers. I thought perhaps I had missed something when I got that message on the other discussion board.

Eastern Mind: I think I understand what you mean by a Western system of caste. If it's not a divide of religious denominations (like the Protestants/Catholics divide I'm most familiar with in N. Ireland), then it's a divide of skin colour or social class. It's not as clear-cut as the caste system in India perhaps, but it exists all the same on a subtler scale in the West.

Devotee: Dear me, that was some scourge God gave to the Hindu people! Yes, I knew it wasn't possible that only a Brahmin could be enlightened! :) It made no sense to me when I considered how only the privileged few could strive for spiritual perfection and self-realisation. Would it not greatly undermine the purpose of karma and cultivating virtues in oneself? These responses have already taken some weight off my shoulders. Oh, and thank you for that reference. I appreciate it when someone gives me direction on where to look for answers in the scriptures.

Ganeshprasad
15 October 2009, 05:41 PM
Pranam Devotee ji


Namaste Sunyata,



... they had the spiritual knowledge which was unparalleled. So, to balance all these, God also gave them the scourge of Casteism in their minds !

care to quote any shastra or is this just an opinion?



My dear friend, there have been many saints who were born/raised in so called lower castes like Maharishi Parashar,

again any evidence please.



None of the incarnation of God was in Brahmin caste. OM

wrong, i can quote you two that did, Vaman Deva, ParsuRam and i am sure i can quote some more if you like but this will do for the moment.

God, the Brits have really screwed the Varna system and now we fall victim to it, i guess nothing happens without his wish

Jai Shree Krishna

chandu_69
15 October 2009, 06:00 PM
Yes, I knew it wasn't possible that only a Brahmin could be enlightened!

That is Nonsense ofcourse.


It made no sense to me when I considered how only the privileged few could strive for spiritual perfection and self-realisation

It never made sense to me either till i read.

Gita :9.32
O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth--women, vaisyas [merchants] and sudras [workers]--can attain the supreme destination.





And what is spiritual perfection?.Did you see any spiritually perfect person on this Board? or in real life?.

I only see confused people who think talking things they dont understand is spiritual perfection.Beware of the confused Souls who think Ignorance is Bliss and living a useless and unproductive Life makes them closer to God.

Please take time to read about different paths of Salvation From GITA.

Eastern Mind
15 October 2009, 07:10 PM
Namaste all:

What makes sense to me? Is this not the only relevant question? Its in the New York Times. Its in the Guardian. Its in India Today. Does it make sense to me?

The Gita, the Koran, the Christian Bible, the Kural, the Tirumanthiram, the Vedas, Upanishada, The Prophet, the Complete Works of Sri Aurobindo... What makes sense to me? What does my gut tell me? What does my inner intelligence tell me? Do I really believe that?

or....

Why do I even need a brain to figure things out? Its all right there in the _______________ , anyway.

In my opinion, scripture is there to support, and add to what it is that you already believe, not to tell you what to believe. If you constantly quote scripture, or look to scripture, isn't that denying your own inner core, and what much scripture itself says. I think scripture has its place, but it is not the be all and end all.

"Lean on your own spine."
"Why ask me?" (You already know.)
"Its not in books, you fool!"
"Oh, oh. What have I been doing all these years? I don't even believe this stuff."

Aum Namasivaya

devotee
16 October 2009, 12:10 AM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



wrong, i can quote you two that did, Vaman Deva, ParsuRam and i am sure i can quote some more if you like but this will do for the moment.

Yes, you are right ! Thanks for the correction. :)

However, there is no other incarnation in Brahmana caste in Vishnu's ten incarnations (if you count Kalki then it would be three but that is yet to happen). All others were in other castes.

Regarding the castes of Maharishi Parashar, Ved VyAs & others mentioned by me, I think you can yourself find out.

OM

Ganeshprasad
16 October 2009, 02:59 PM
Pranam devotee ji


Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,

Regarding the castes of Maharishi Parashar, Ved VyAs & others mentioned by me, I think you can yourself find out.

OM

thank you but i think you need to back up what you quote, onus is on you to provide evidence and i am only interested on Parasar Muni

Jai Shree Krishna

yajvan
16 October 2009, 06:39 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté Ganeshprasad & devotee



Pranam devotee ji
thank you but i think you need to back up what you quote, onus is on you to provide evidence and i am only interested on Parasar Muni
Jai Shree Krishna

I am not the final authority on this matter, but know of Parāśara.
He is Parāśara Śāktya, a ṛṣi we find in the ṛg ved; mantra-s 1.65 to 1.73 would be a good example of his 'seeing'. He too is the author of Bṛhat Parāśara Horāśāstra , a jyotiṣ handbook that far surpasses any other work I have seen.

His father was Śakti-muni. Śakti-muni's father was Vaśiṣṭa ( another great ṛṣi of the ṛg ved) ; and who was Vaśiṣṭa's father? It is said it is Brahmā.
If we do some looking around, we will find Vaśiṣṭa was a raj-purohita; raj रज + purohita पुरोहित : raja or of a king + purohita or priest, one placed foremost or in front i.e. holding a charge or commission; hence a brāhmaṇa.
What then of his grandson Parāśara? I will let you decide the appropriate varṇa.

praṇām

devotee
16 October 2009, 11:03 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



thank you but i think you need to back up what you quote, onus is on you to provide evidence and i am only interested on Parasar Muni


The onus lies on me to explain to the person whom I am addressing & not to each & everyone here. That is too demanding. It was not you who I was talking to in this thread. So, it is not obligatory on my part to give proof of each & every word I write here, as demanded by you.

Anyway, this is as per information available with me on Maharishi Parashar :

Maharishi Parashar was grandson of Maharishi Vashishtha. He was the son of Shakti Muni & a ChAndAla woman.

If you have any other information, please share that with us.

OM

harekrishna
17 October 2009, 01:43 AM
... there have been many saints who were born/raised in so called lower castes like Maharishi Parashar, Ved VyAs, Mahatma Vidur, Kabir, Sant Ravidas etc. etc. ...
OM

The lotus grows in muddy and dirty water. Pure and clean water wont cut it. Diamonds are there in between coal. They are not found in white marble mines. So people arguing that coal will only produce coal, forget that there are diamonds hidden in it. I am just using this as a metaphor, and not equating any group of people with inferior quality.

As told here, some of the greatest Rshis were not born into Brahmana Kula.
Maharshi Aitreya Mahidasa: His mother was a maid named ‘Itara’.
Rishika Lopamudra: She was a Kshatriya princess from Vidarbha, who married Maharshi Agastya.
Maharshi Vishwamitra: He was originally a Kshatriya named ‘Vishwaratha’.
Maharshi Veda Vyasa: He was the son of a fisher-woman named Satyavati, from Rishi Parashara.
Maharshi Valmiki: He had become a chandaala named Ratnakara. It is claimed that he was born into the family of sages. He is now considered a hero among the so-called untouchables.
Rishika Sulabhaa Maitreyi: She was a Kshatriya lady starting the Saulabha Shakha of the Rigveda.
Mahatma Vidura: He was the son of Maharshi Veda Vyasa and a maid of King Dhritrashtra .
Gautama Buddha: The founder of Buddhism belonged to a marginal Kshatriya tribe called Shakya. He lived and died as a Hindu.
Bhakta Nammalvar: The foremost of the Alvar Vaishnava saints, he was a Shudra by birth.
Sikh Gurus: All the Sikh Gurus, from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh, were Kshatriyas.
Saint Kabir: He was brought-up by ‘Julaha’ couple. Julahas are a Muslim caste of weavers.
Swami Vivekananda: One of the foremost reformers and teachers of modern Hinduism, he was of Kayastha subcaste of Bengal.
I am sure one can find many more exponents from non-Brahmana Kulas. Of course, Brahmana Kulas produces great many Rshis.
Today's casteism in India (and it has been like that for a while..) is a deviant and oppressive expression of noble Vedic injunctions.
HariH Om!
Harekrishna

Harjas Kaur
17 October 2009, 03:46 AM
"...I recently expressed my (positive) opinion about a certain spiritual teacher on another discussion board, only to have someone come along and reply back: "She is not a Brahmin... why then do you respect a Shudra lady?" In those words. I'm not sure if this comment was made to me to incite a certain response, because I honestly don't know what to make of it..."
I will tell you all a true story though you may find it hard to believe. To avoid unnecessary criticisms against Her, I will not name the "shudra lady" of my experience since the topic is not about a personality.

I was an amritdhari in a Khalistani sangat for about 7 years. I took amrit in the AKJ, the Jatha from which the Babbar Khalsa originated. For years I believed in Sant Bhindranwale. His picture was on my wall. I wasn't exactly "anti-Hindu" but as a point of political resentment I vowed not to enter a Hindu mandir.

And then for some inexplicable reason I started to discover the hidden sanatana Dharma within Sikh scripture. I read all this since my youth, but suddenly it was different. It completely changed on me. I lost my good reputation in Sikh sangat for defending the "Hinduism" in Sikh religion. I was called many things. "Indian agent." "Cancer agent." "Traitor." "Non-Sikh."

And for some inexplicable reason I couldn't change my view. Every time I read Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the Guru's mat was Sanatana Dharma. And I couldn't change it back. I couldn't go back to the old view. I started being suddenly open to the Hinduism in the teachings and grew in me a strong desire to visit Hindu saints.

So I went to visit the "Shudra Lady." I was more concerned about Her Hinduness than Her varna to be honest, lol. I can't tell anyone why I wanted to go and see Her so badly, but for some reason, I did. And I had experience with the "Shudra Lady" that was off the map. There's no way to prove the reality of an experience to someone else. You simply have to have your own experience.

I don't even know if my "Shudra lady" is the same as your "Shudra Lady." In my experience, She wasn't a "Shudra Lady." She wasn't even only in the human body. There was this incredible Divine Being of brilliant Light that blew my mind completely. And I would just call it like a near-death experience, but meeting this Divine Light was like the reason for coming into the world. The reason for living and the reason for dying. And if I could have died in that moment my life would have been fulfilled. I had an experience of what glory is. It was so incredible that I lost consciousness and came back to ordinary consciousness with tears flowing from my eyes. And all I wanted to do was touch my forehead to the ground I was so humbled by that Presence.

I can't explain, but I've always loved that incredible Light. To be separated from it is like a grief. This ordinary consciousness is like death and that experience was like real life. The Beloved of ages was shining through a humble, simple "Shudra Lady." And I was less than the dust of Her feet.

Everything about my ideas about spirituality crumbled completely in the Presence of this wondrous Light. So that is how I came to be a Hindu-Sikh and have a Hindu Guru.



There's a story of a swami who was meditating for decades in the Himalayas. One day a sick and decrepit starving dog stumbled into his dwelling. He had pity on the suffering creature and tried to warm it, feed it and give it kindness. But the dog died.

The next day he had Darshan of Shiva Ji. But he was resentful that Shiva took so long to come. So he scolded Shiva Ji saying, "I've practiced all these austerities and you left me all alone. And Shiva Ji said, "No really I was here with you." And the swami Ji said, "No! You aren't supposed to lie. I was alone, you weren't here." Shiva Ji said, "I'm not lying. Look, I'll prove it to you. Pick me up and put me on your shoulder. Then go out with your begging bowl and see if anybody else notices me."

So the swami went out the next morning with Shiva Ji on his shoulder and his begging bowl in his hands. He knocked on the doors of many houses but received the usual alms. No one seemed able to recognize the luminous Shiva Ji on the swami's shoulder. So the swami said to Lord Shiva, "I'm sorry. You were right. You're invisible to all these people. And Shiva Ji said, "No, not invisible. But they don't perceive me as I am. There is one more house for us to go to. Let's go there, and you will understand."

So the swami went with the brilliantly luminous Shiva Ji on his shoulder to the last house. A woman answered the door, gave a peculiar look at the swami and threw a few rupees at him saying, "Now get out of here and take that stinking corpse of a dead dog with you."

What we perceive depends on our mentality. Darshan of what hides beyond human is sheer grace. Even in the lowest thing the very Highest abides.

Ganeshprasad
17 October 2009, 06:28 AM
Pranam Devotee ji and all Happy Diwali


Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



The onus lies on me to explain to the person whom I am addressing & not to each & everyone here. That is too demanding. It was not you who I was talking to in this thread. So, it is not obligatory on my part to give proof of each & every word I write here, as demanded by you.

Anyway, this is as per information available with me on Maharishi Parashar :

Maharishi Parashar was grandson of Maharishi Vashishtha. He was the son of Shakti Muni & a ChAndAla woman.

If you have any other information, please share that with us.

OM

Thank you, I am sorry to have bothered you, you are right you have no obligation what so ever to me.

If I feel there is obvious inaccuracy I may just point that out with out any reference to you.

As to the reason I asked of Parashar Maharishi was to establish again the truth, fact of the matter is and the tradition has always been, the son inherit’s the father’s Gotra, neither Parasar or Vyasdev can be classified as born in to lower varna, just as the son of a King notwithstanding who the mother is, will always be a prince.

Jai Shree Krishna

Harjas Kaur
17 October 2009, 04:55 PM
ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਮਲ ਪੁਤੁ ਮੀਨ ਬਿਆਸਾ ਤਪੁ ਤਾਪਨ ਪੂਜ ਕਰਾਵੈਗੋ ॥
breham kamal puth meen biaasaa thap thaapan pooj karaavaigo ||
Brahma, the son of the lotus, and Vyaas, the son of the fish, practiced austere penance and were worshipped.
~SGGS Ji ang 1309.
What varna was the fish?


ਜਾਣਹੁ ਜੋਤਿ ਨ ਪੂਛਹੁ ਜਾਤੀ ਆਗੈ ਜਾਤਿ ਨ ਹੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
jaanahu joth n pooshhahu jaathee aagai jaath n hae ||1|| rehaao ||
Recognize the Lord's Light within all, and do not consider social class or status; there are no classes or castes in the world hereafter. ||1||Pause||
~SGGS Ji ang 349


ਭਗਤੁ ਭਗਤੁ ਜਗਿ ਵਜਿਆ ਚਹੁ ਚਕਾਂ ਦੇ ਵਿਚਿ ਚਮਿਰੇਟਾ ।
bhagatu bhagatu jagi vajiaa chahu chakaan day vichi chamiraytaa|
The tanner (Ravidas) became renowned as bhagat (saint) in all the four directions.

ਪਾਣ੍ਹਾ ਗੰਢੈ ਰਾਹ ਵਿਚਿ ਕੁਲਾ ਧਰਮ ਢੋਇ ਢੋਰ ਸਮੇਟਾ ।
paanhaa ganddhai raah vichi kulaa dharam ddhoi ddhor samaytaa|
In accordance with his family tradition he would cobble the shoes and carry away the dead animals.

ਜਿਉ ਕਰਿ ਮੈਲੇ ਚੀਥੜੇ ਹੀਰਾ ਲਾਲੁ ਅਮੋਲੁ ਪਲੇਟਾ ।
jiu kari mailay cheedarhay heeraa|aalu amolu palaytaa|
This was his outward routine but in reality he was a gem wrapped in rags.

ਚਹੁ ਵਰਨਾ ਉਪਦੇਸਦਾ ਗਿਆਨ ਧਿਆਨੁ ਕਰਿ ਭਗਤਿ ਸਹੇਟਾ ।
chahu varanaa upadaysadaa giaan dhiaanu kari bhagati sahaytaa|
He would preach all the four varnas (castes). His preaching made them rapt in the meditative devotion for the Lord.

ਨ੍ਹਾਵਣਿ ਆਇਆ ਸੰਗੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਬਾਨਾਰਸ ਕਰਿ ਗੰਗਾ ਥੇਟਾ ।
nhaavani aaiaa sangu mili baanaaras kari gangaa daytaa|
Once, a group of people went to Kasi (Varanasi) to have their sacred dip in the Ganges.

ਕਢਿ ਕਸੀਰਾ ਸਉਪਿਆ ਰਵਿਦਾਸੈ ਗੰਗਾ ਦੀ ਭੇਟਾ ।
kaddhi kaseeraa saupiaa ravidaasai gangaa dee bhaytaa|
Ravidas gave one dhela (half a pice) to one member and asked him to offer it to the Ganges.

ਲਗਾ ਪੁਰਬੁ ਅਭੀਚ ਦਾ ਡਿਠਾ ਚਲਿਤੁ ਅਚਰਜੁ ਅਮੇਟਾ ।
lagaa purabu abheech daa ditdaa chalitu acharaju amaytaa|
A great festival of Abhijit naksatr (star) was on there where the public saw this wonderful episode.

ਲਇਆ ਕਸੀਰਾ ਹਥੁ ਕਢਿ ਸੂਤੁ ਇਕੁ ਜਿਉ ਤਾਣਾ ਪੇਟਾ ।
laiaa kaseeraa hadu kaddhi sootu iku jiu taanaa paytaa|
Ganges, herself taking out her hand accepted that paltry amount, dhela, and proved that Ravidas was one with Ganges as warp and weft.

ਭਗਤ ਜਨਾਂ ਹਰਿ ਮਾਂ ਪਿਉ ਬੇਟਾ ॥੧੭॥
bhagat janaan hari maan piu baytaa ॥17॥
For bhagats (saints,) God is their mother, father and son all in one.
~Vaar 10 Pauri 17 of Vaaran Bhai Gurdas Ji

yajvan
17 October 2009, 07:37 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté devotee & Ganeshprasad


Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,
The onus lies on me to explain to the person whom I am addressing & not to each & everyone here. That is too demanding. It was not you who I was talking to in this thread. So, it is not obligatory on my part to give proof of each & every word I write here, as demanded by you.
I wrote in a previous post,
I am not the final authority on this matter, but know of Parāśara, etc. etc.
If my post in some way offended you or I took liberty in posting into a conversation that was more between the two of you, I ask your pardon.

I know conversations amongst us are devoid of ire or ill-will even over the discussion of one's varṇa. I was under the impression we (as with you both) were trying to reconcile the lineage out of genuine interest?


If I am wrong or remiss with my assessment , let me know.

praṇām

devotee
17 October 2009, 09:35 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji and Yajvan ji,


you are right you have no obligation what so ever to me.
If I feel there is obvious inaccuracy I may just point that out without any reference to you.


I think I need to clarify my post here. The portion of the post highlighted by me is what should be done, imho. I don't agree with the term, "without any reference to you".

I share my views/ my understanding / my knowledge here. If there is something lacking or erroneous & that is corrected/ supported by any other member here then it benefits me & the others who may be interested in the discussion. That is why I thanked Ganeshprasad ji in my earlier post.

Asking for scriptural references also is not wrong if there is a disagreement on some issues but it is better to clarify why the references are being asked for so that the answers can be formulated in line with the issue in question. However, asking for scriptural references/proof without clarifying the disagreement is nothing but playing mind game, which more often than not, degenerates into a game - "I know better than you !". That only results in bitterness. My above post was my way of indicating that I am not interested in playing any such game. That doesn't mean I have any bad feeling towards Ganeshprasad ji. I consider him one of my friends here. And Yajvan ji, you enjoy a very high respect in my heart. If any of my posts gives any other feeling, please forgive me for my poor choice of words & phrases. In fact, I always wished I had the calmness of your mind, your skill of presentation of issues with clarity & skill of keeping yourself out of meaningless discussions.

In my personal opinion, it is better for me to have people around me who have better knowledge than me. This feeling assures me that I am in a good company. So, if Ganeshprasad ji, Yajvan ji, Atanu, Saidevo ji, EM & others know more than me & their understanding is better than that of mine then it is I who has the advantage.

Regards to both of you,

OM

Ganeshprasad
18 October 2009, 06:04 AM
Pranam Yajvan ji & Devotee ji, Happy new year to all


hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté devotee & Ganeshprasad


I wrote in a previous post,
If my post in some way offended you or I took liberty in posting into a conversation that was more between the two of you, I ask your pardon.
If I am wrong or remiss with my assessment , let me know.

praṇām


not at all, you are always welcome to have your input.



I know conversations amongst us are devoid of ire or ill-will even over the discussion of one's varṇa. I was under the impression we (as with you both) were trying to reconcile the lineage out of genuine interest?


You are perfectly correct in your assumption, that was the only intention of mine, and devotee ji I do not play mind games, I have no axe to grind with any one, each to their own, that is not to say I have no opinion of mine but as a Hindu if I have learned one thing from it, is not to insist that on others.
I am a traditionalist at heart, I believe in varna system and I know birth has significant impact on it.

Jai Shree Krishna

yajvan
18 October 2009, 11:26 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté devotee & Ganeshprasad


all is well with the world.

praṇām

Ganeshprasad
18 October 2009, 11:39 AM
Pranam Yajvan


hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~



all is well with the world.

praṇām

Now i wonder why.
Krishna says this world is full misery and it is teomparary, duhkhalayam asasvatam bg.8 1.5

Jai Shree Krishna

sunyata07
18 October 2009, 03:28 PM
Namaste Harjas Kaur,

Maybe we are speaking of the same "Shudra" lady. It's hard to say. But I know now that after reading your post, I feel like now more than ever I would so dearly love to meet this particular lady I am speaking of, even just to be in her presence to get a sensation of what I have heard others have felt from her. Just even to see her would be enough for me. I really believe perhaps I would feel the same thing you have experienced. Generally speaking, my personality is such that I am a rather emotionally closed individual. I'm not prone to sentimentality and I rarely, if ever, cry or feel any inclination to. However, I have experienced moments when I have wept incredibly hard - probably crying more than I have ever done in any other time in my life, and not from grief or sadness - just from watching videos (the vibrations in this woman must be an incredible thing to experience in person) of this "Shudra" lady speak and see how much hope and love she has inspired in people. I really hope I can meet her in the future.

Thanks for your sharing your story, by the way. That parable you included at the end of your post was beautiful and so very true.

OM Shanti

devotee
18 October 2009, 09:54 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



As to the reason I asked of Parashar Maharishi was to establish again the truth, fact of the matter is and the tradition has always been, the son inherit’s the father’s Gotra, neither Parasar or Vyasdev can be classified as born in to lower varna, just as the son of a King notwithstanding who the mother is, will always be a prince.


If what you state here (in bold form above) was correct, then there was no need for VajrashUchikA Upanishad to talk of the mothers of the saints in that Upanishad. I shall quote here the excerpt :


Then, if is said that the class by birth (or familial lineage or genus) bears the designation 'Brahmin', then no (i.e., this cannot be true), because there are several non-human species from whom numerous great Sages emerged.
We hear from the sacred texts that
- Sage Rsyasrnga was born of a deer,
- Sage Kausika of the Kusa grass,
- Sage Jambuka from a jackal,
- Sage Valmiki from white termite hill,
- Sage Vyasa from a fisher woman,
- Sage Gautama from the back of a hare,
- Sage Vasishtha from Urvashi- the celestial nymph
- Sage Agastya from a pitcher.
Amongst these, there have been many Sages who have been amongst the foremost of men that have demonstrated spiritual realization.
Therefore, it is not one's class by birth that can be taken as (the determinant of the designation) ‘Brahmin'." || 5 ||

If what you say is correct then there should not have been any word like "Varnashankar". Then the relatively new castes like "Khatri" and "Kayashtha" were not needed in Hindu society & they would not have come into being at all. Then the term, "DogalA" would not have been considered a derogatory term in Hindu society.

Moreover, this statement only adds to another dark dimension to thinking within Hindu society which is "Male chauvinism" & reducing females to a non-entity. The mother who keeps the child in her womb for 9 months, who nourishes the child in her womb for 9 months with her own blood & who then nourishes the child with her milk for months together after birth, who is the first teacher of the child before he is capable of learning anything from anyone else ... is reduced to just a non-entity ?

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

In your next post the words used by you are carefully chosen & if what I understand is correct then there is no difference of opinion between you & me :

I am a traditionalist at heart, I believe in varna system and I know birth has significant impact on it.

Varna system is ok. But the Varna system was created by Lord Himself & so it must apply to the entire human race & not only to the small population of the Hindus. Again, the verses from Bhagwad Gita, Chapter 18.41 to 18.44 discusses about the natural Guna & Karma of the different Varnas. So, to decide the Varna of a person we must match the Guna & Karma indicated in these verses with those of that person.

Similarly, birth does play an important role which is decided by a person's Guna & Karma in his past birth.

My submission in this thread was against branding a person belonging to a certain Varna based on his birth alone.

OM

Ganeshprasad
20 October 2009, 09:43 AM
Pranam Devotee


Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



If what you state here (in bold form above) was correct, then there was no need for VajrashUchikA Upanishad to talk of the mothers of the saints in that Upanishad. I shall quote here the excerpt :



Moreover, this statement only adds to another dark dimension to thinking within Hindu society which is "Male chauvinism" & reducing females to a non-entity. The mother who keeps the child in her womb for 9 months, who nourishes the child in her womb for 9 months with her own blood & who then nourishes the child with her milk for months together after birth, who is the first teacher of the child before he is capable of learning anything from anyone else ... is reduced to just a non-entity ?

A mother is an embodiment of love, if I had to choose between moksa and the caring unconditional love of a mother I will always choose the later there is no contest.
Male chauvinism hmm! Lets not get emotional these are great topic in it self but does not help sort out the topic of varna.
 

 
Quote:
Then, if is said that the class by birth (or familial lineage or genus) bears the designation 'Brahmin', then no (i.e., this cannot be true), because there are several non-human species from whom numerous great Sages emerged.
We hear from the sacred texts that
- Sage Rsyasrnga was born of a deer,
- Sage Kausika of the Kusa grass,
- Sage Jambuka from a jackal,
- Sage Valmiki from white termite hill,
- Sage Vyasa from a fisher woman,
- Sage Gautama from the back of a hare,
- Sage Vasishtha from Urvashi- the celestial nymph
- Sage Agastya from a pitcher.
Amongst these, there have been many Sages who have been amongst the foremost of men that have demonstrated spiritual realization.
Therefore, it is not one's class by birth that can be taken as (the determinant of the designation) ‘Brahmin'." || 5 ||

We can see these are all very divine and extraordinary event, these example can not be taken to formulate a general rule.

 



If what you say is correct then there should not have been any word like "Varnashankar". Then the relatively new castes like "Khatri" and "Kayashtha" were not needed in Hindu society & they would not have come into being at all.

Due to influence of time, degradation of varna was inevitable, mixing of varnas, obviously leads to Varnashankar that is what Arjun was worried about in chapter one at the end.

I don’t know what exactly the point you are trying to make here. Those rare examples are no guide to the general rules.



Then the term, "DogalA" would not have been considered a derogatory term in Hindu society.

I have no idea what this is.
 
 
 


Varna system is ok. But the Varna system was created by Lord Himself & so it must apply to the entire human race & not only to the small population of the Hindus.

Yes, but then you must also recognise that the system is only prevalent in Hindus rest of the world has no faith in it, hindus do not impose this on anyone, since they are out of the system, what ever the reason, it is the Lords design.



Again, the verses from Bhagwad Gita, Chapter 18.41 to 18.44 discusses about the natural Guna & Karma of the different Varnas. So, to decide the Varna of a person we must match the Guna & Karma indicated in these verses with those of that person.

Again you are putting the emphasis of deciding a varna by humans who are prone to making mistakes. Frankly those yardstick that Bhagvat Gita speaks off are there to be cultivated and the training begins at a very early stage, this can only happen without any confusion if we accept the fact that Yamraj knows what he is doing and the birth in a particular yoni is due to ones Guna and Karma.



My submission in this thread was against branding a person belonging to a certain Varna based on his birth alone.

It is noble, but I am not surprised at all that it can happen.
Arjun did it to Karan on his apparent birth so did Dronacharya.
No less a personality, Balaram made that mistake with Romaharṣaṇa.

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
20 October 2009, 10:01 AM
I don't think there is any point discussing further. I quit this thread here.

OM

TatTvamAsi
20 October 2009, 05:03 PM
Did you say "Caste"?