PDA

View Full Version : Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding



Pages : [1] 2

mukunda20
19 March 2010, 04:54 AM
Namaste everyone,
In another thread titled "does not exist..." under Science and Religion section, one of the honorable HDF members claimed that in the Bhagavad Gita Sri Krishna himself tells that varna is based on birth. So i took the liberty of starting a new thread in order to refute the claims. The moderator can remove this thread if it violates any rules since the thread being referred is under admin review.
here is the actual quote
"Quote: Sanjaya said
Secondly, I believe that your portrayal of the Hindu varna system is not accurate.

Nara replied:
It is here that I think I am on most firm ground. The Moguls are not to blame. The English are not to blame. Hindus, and the upper caste in particular, have to stand up and take responsibility and make amends.

Lord Sri Krishna in Srimat BG, with what he said and what he did not say, clearly indicates Varna is inherited by birth. Among Arjuna’s fears was that the war will result in the women being unprotected and consequently get raped, which will then result in Varna sangraha. Arjuna cites clan elders as the source of his views.

So, this was the prevalent thinking at that time, namely, if women get raped, varna sangharaha will result. This can be so only if Varna results from birth. In the succeeding 17 chapters, Lord Sri Krishna gives answers to many of Arjuna’s questions, never once does he dissuade him of this view. But Lord Sri Krishna goes even further. In chapter 9, he says, even the ones of sinful birth, such as vaishya, sudra and women, can attain moksham by surrendering to him, so surely Arjuna of punya birth certainly can. So, Lord Sri Krishna clearly teaches that Varna results from birth which itself is determined by punya and papa.

So, if BG is to be believed, then for Lord Sri Krishna, varana is birth based. If you visit kamakoti.org, there is a full chapter on this question affirming that varna/jati is based strictly on birth. This is a core value of the Vedic religion that we call Hinduism today.

If you look at scientific evidence gleaned from archeology, DNA, etc. it is clear that there is no pure varna, everything is mixed up. As you say, there have been movements across the varna lines. But that is science. Religious doctrine requires birth based Varna purity and an elaborate scheme of punishments are stipulated for transgressors. Further, the present day keepers of Brahmin orthodoxy still maintain they can trace their pure genealogy back to the vedic rishees. What this shows, I leave it to you.
"
The actual verse where Sri Krishna speaks about the Varnashrama is Chapter 4 verse 13 which states

"cātur (http://vedabase.net/c/catur)-varṇyaḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/varnyam) mayā (http://vedabase.net/m/maya) sṛṣṭaḿ (http://vedabase.net/s/srstam)
guṇa (http://vedabase.net/g/guna)-karma (http://vedabase.net/k/karma)-vibhāgaśaḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vibhagasah)
tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) kartāram (http://vedabase.net/k/kartaram) api (http://vedabase.net/a/api) māḿ (http://vedabase.net/m/mam)
viddhy akartāram (http://vedabase.net/a/akartaram) avyayam (http://vedabase.net/a/avyayam)
"
translation
"According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable."

Here clearly Sri Krishna states the principle of the varna system which is based totally on guna(modes) and Karma.
Nowhere has Sri Krishna mentioned the word janana(birth).

"It is here that I think I am on most firm ground.
Lord Sri Krishna in Srimat BG, with what he said and what he did not say, clearly indicates Varna is inherited by birth.
So, if BG is to be believed, then for Lord Sri Krishna, varana is birth based"
I think this verse is enough to refute all the above claims. please feel free to refute in case anyone thinks the above verse does not convey what it already has.

meaning of the Sanskrit words
cātuḥ (http://vedabase.net/c/catuh)-varṇyam (http://vedabase.net/v/varnyam) — the four divisions of human society; mayā (http://vedabase.net/m/maya) — by Me (http://vedabase.net/m/me); sṛṣṭam (http://vedabase.net/s/srstam) — created; guṇa (http://vedabase.net/g/guna) — of quality; karma (http://vedabase.net/k/karma) — and work; vibhāgaśaḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vibhagasah) — in (http://vedabase.net/i/in) terms of division; tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) — of that; kartāram (http://vedabase.net/k/kartaram) — the Creator; api (http://vedabase.net/a/api) — although; mām (http://vedabase.net/m/mam) — Me (http://vedabase.net/m/me); viddhi (http://vedabase.net/v/viddhi) — you may know; akartāram (http://vedabase.net/a/akartaram) — as (http://vedabase.net/a/as) the nondoer; avyayam (http://vedabase.net/a/avyayam) — unchangeable.

Best Regards,
mukunda

devotee
19 March 2010, 05:28 AM
Namaste Mukunda,

Thanks for the verse's reality. :)

There are other verses too which show that Varna is based on Guna and Karma and not by birth :

The Brahmin should have these gunas by nature :

Shamo damstapah shaucham kshaantirarjavameva cha |
Jnaanam vijnaanamaastikyam brahmakarma swabhawjam || 18. 42 ||

The Kshtriya should have these :

Shauryam tejo dhritirdaakshyam yuddhe chaapypalaayanam |
daanamishwarbhaavascha khsaatram karma svabhaavajam || 18.43 ||

The Vaishya and Shudras should have these gunas by nature :

krishigaurkshyavaaNijyam vaishyakarma swabhaavjam |
paricharyaatmakam karma shudrasyaapi svabhaavajam || 18. 44 ||

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Lord Krishna nowhere says that varna is decided by birth alone. Though the birth to a particular family, place & culture is certainly decided by one's karma in his previous birth, but varna depends basically on guna and karma & thus can change depending upon his Guna and Karma in this birth.

Verses in Chapter 1 were spoken by Arjuna & not by Lord Krishna. Verse 9.32 doesn't say that the varna is by birth !

OM

keshava
19 March 2010, 07:17 AM
But Lord Sri Krishna goes even further. In chapter 9, he says, even the ones of sinful birth, such as vaishya, sudra and women, can attain moksham by surrendering to him
OM


Dandvats
He doesnt say women sudra and vaishya are sinful births he seperates them as different classes eg sinful birth, vaishy, sudra, women.

Ganeshprasad
19 March 2010, 10:11 AM
Pranam devotee

I have been down this route quite a lot, so I try and be brief.

Perhaps you can tell us all at what age the training of a child in their respective varna should begin?

With your perception there is a possibility of all 4 varna in theory, in one single family, assuming you know that in olden days there were different quarters for each varna, remnants off which you would still find in the villages or even a big town. So how do you separate the family?

Arjun’s fear of Varna Shankar and consequently kula dharma degradation would be point less since you wan’t be able to establish what tradition that could be, because by your reckoning it could be any one of the four.
But we know his tradition is kshatriya class. how is that possible?



but varna depends basically on guna and karma & thus can change depending upon his Guna and Karma in this birth.

But then this would be in direct conflict with what Lord Krishna say
It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.

You are proposing a change can happen yet Krishna is against it.

Who can perfectly judge the varna of an individual thus my opening question to you?

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
19 March 2010, 10:11 PM
Namaste GP ji,

I think we have already discussed this issue once & I couldn't convince you. So, going again the same way is not going to result in anything better.

I won't say that you are wrong and I alone am right in interpretation of verses. However, if you see the verses in the light of the basic expectations from God, you may get to know why I interpret the way I do :

a) When we talk of Karma, we tend to think of Karma of the past alone. My Guru ji says that this thinking is not correct. Your present Karmas are not less valuable than your past karmas. The Karma of this life can offset the Karma of our previous lives.

The above has a logical side also. If the above is not true then it paints a grim and hopeless picture for the present life. My Guru ji says that it is not the case.

b) If Varna by birth theory was correct then you would not have found people sometimes even more intelligent and pious in a so-called lower caste than in a brahmin by birth. Similarly, then all Brahmins must have been born with the Gunas & nature as told by Lord Krishna in Chapter 18 of BG.

We know that it is not so.

c) Lord Krishna says that people should do the karma which is natural to their nature .... so, it must be natural to the nature of the man irrespective of his birth ? I have not seen that the birth in a particular caste decides one's nature and guna.

d) Yes, Arjuna does mention about Varnashankara being born out of women who would get spoiled after war. But again, it can be seen in the manner I see it. If there is no control on sex then the birth of a child would not be due to marriage of a man & woman of the same varna (i.e. same guna, karma and nature) but just a result of lust without matching qualities of a man & woman for marriage. So, such a child is certainly varnashankara. We can expect that the children born would also learn similar traits from their parents & that would be painful to everyone including their ancestors.

This can be seen in western society ... how much restlessness has it produced for people who follow such a lifestyle.

e) The great saints in Hindu society have embraced people from all castes. There are many saints who were not born to brahmin parents like Saint Ravidas, Kabir etc.

Again, these are solely my views & I am firm on this. Right from my childhood, I never differentiated people on the basis of castes and had a close friend too who was from so-called untouchable caste. I got scolded by my parents many a times on this account ... but I was like that. In fact, the biggest hurdle for me to accept BG as divine word of God was these verses which bothered me a lot. I could find my peace only when I translated them in the manner I explained to you.

So, there is nothing which can change my views. You may have your own interpretation ... & still we can be friends.

OM

Ganeshprasad
20 March 2010, 03:33 PM
Pranam devotee ji

Nice explanation of your understanding and I respect that
Why should frendship be questioned just because we have different views on Varna?



So, there is nothing which can change my views. You may have your own interpretation ... & still we can be friends.
 
In this circumstances there is no need for further discussion.
Yes you have made a nice plea for your understanding and I respect that, unfortunately my questioned that I had asked remains unanswered.

There is only one question that was posed by you which I shall try my best to answer



b) If Varna by birth theory was correct then you would not have found people sometimes even more intelligent and pious in a so-called lower caste than in a brahmin by birth. Similarly, then all Brahmins must have been born with the Gunas & nature as told by Lord Krishna in Chapter 18 of BG.

We know that it is not so.
 
 
The lofty ideals that Lord Shree Krishna mentioned in BG are what one has to cultivate but if you think anyone has imbibed all of it in 100% then you will find none would qualify for that post.

After taking such a birth, O Arjuna, one regains the knowledge acquired in the previous life, and strives again to achieve perfection. (6.43)

Birth affords the only measurable prerequisite for determining how a child should be trained. There is no other authority to determine the varna, your proposal is very subjective.

A Brahmin is accorded a great deal of respect as per our dharma-Shastra, but those same dharma-Shastra place extremely high expectations on him. He can't fulfil those expectations if he is not raised as a Brahmin from birth, which means having Brahmin parents who can also lead by example. Yet if we fail and that is great possibility in this degraded age, again the karma will determine our next birth and there is no guarantee it will be human.

The highest knowledge of saMnyAsAshrama declares that all men are equal in the eye of god, and that varNa, Ashrama, and ultimately even dharma, are superfluous constructs. But this esoteric wisdom has unfortunately become exoteric dogma in some non-brAhmaNa circles, and the dismissal of varNAshrama dharma is especially favored by aspirants who were born without dvija varNa (by our own Sarbhnga)

I will leave you with two example for you to contemplate. One Drona who had great Kshtriya skill and other BhismaPita a great Kshtriya but had wisdom better then most yet Dronacharya is a Brahmin and Bhismapita is Kshtriya, neither saw any reason to be known by their vocation but their birth was and is their Pahechan or identity.

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
20 March 2010, 10:21 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,

Sorry, I forgot to answer your questions. Yes, I have answers to all your questions as these questions bothered my too. And whether I may satisfy others or not, I have to satisfy myself fully that my interpretations are the correct interpretation & it is not only for keeping myself deluded.



Perhaps you can tell us all at what age the training of a child in their respective varna should begin?

How is the child to be trained & when ? Who can decide it better than his Guru ? Let Guru decide whether he has to be trained as a Brahmin, a Khastriya, a Vaishya or a ShUdra. Perhaps the question which bothers you is how do you identify these traits at such early stage of life ?

See, the Brahmin is the highest state ... and unless the desired laskhanas are clearly visible, the training as Brahmin can wait. He has to learn many other traits of other varnas & that itself will take considerable time. The child should be with Guru for 25 years of age & Guru may decide at what stage a child is so exceptional that he is fit to be trained as a Brahmin.

In fact, the brahminhood should be the highest degree that should be conferred on a student. At the time of passing out, the Guru would declare a student as a Brahmin, a Kshatriya, a Vaishya or a ShUdra … depending upon their academic performance. Just imagine, if that is done, how perfect our society will be.


With your perception there is a possibility of all 4 varna in theory, in one single family, assuming you know that in olden days there were different quarters for each varna, remnants off which you would still find in the villages or even a big town. So how do you separate the family?

Ah ! That is not due to varna but due to caste system. The system is prevalent in non-Hindus too. The rich and poor always lives different colonies. There is no question of separation of family members. Every Varna is respectable ... why should we need separation at all ?


It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.

I fully agree with Lord Krishna. One should be trained in an occupation which comes natural to his gunas acquired by birth. It doesn’t support Varna by birth theory.


You are proposing a change can happen yet Krishna is against it.

There is no verse from Krishna in BG supporting that Krishna even recognizes varna by birth theory.


Who can perfectly judge the varna of an individual thus my opening question to you?

The Guru, I answered above.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000


The lofty ideals that Lord Shree Krishna mentioned in BG are what y one has to cultivate but if you think anyone has imbibed all of it in 100% then you will find none would qualify for that post.

Does Krishna say that these are lofty ideals & even if these traits are 0 % present, he should do the varna/caste's duty as decided by his birth ? What would happen if we have a Kshatriya who is afraid to fight, A Brahmin who is dumb-headed, a Vaishya who has knowledge of all the Vedas but cannot be a good trader, a ShUdra who is a great fighter ? Just imagine what would have happened, if we had trained APJ Abdul Kalam Azad, Issac Newton, Einstein as ShUdra as they were Avarna by birth ?? Or Gautam Buddha as a warrior ?? Krishna himself was a yadava by birth … he had no need to learn to fight as a Kshatriya & never try to teach anyone like a Brahmana … but he fought as a great warrior in wars & even taught highest philosophy to Arjuna … why didn’t he keep himself busy in milking cows & selling the milk and milk products ?


After taking such a birth, O Arjuna, one regains the knowledge acquired in the previous life, and strives again to achieve perfection. (6.43)

Perfectly correct ! How does it support the Varna by birth theory ?


The highest knowledge of saMnyAsAshrama declares that all men are equal in the eye of god, and that varNa, Ashrama, and ultimately even dharma, are superfluous constructs. But this esoteric wisdom has unfortunately become exoteric dogma in some non-brAhmaNa circles, and the dismissal of varNAshrama dharma is especially favored by aspirants who were born without dvija varNa (by our own Sarbhnga)

Tell me one thing, Ganeshprasad ji, all your fathers’ children as you know them today should have been trained only the occupation as decided by their birth to certain family or as decided by their intellectual capabilities and natural instincts ? Think of your children, your friends’ and relatives’ children and you will realize that varna by birth theory could have done irreparable damage to those children and to the society. If varna by birth theory is correct and supported by God Himself, then it must apply to all races, in all times and in all lands. It is certainly not so.


I will leave you with two example for you to contemplate. One Drona who had great Kshtriya skill and other BhismaPita a great Kshtriya but had wisdom better then most yet Dronacharya is a Brahmin and Bhismapita is Kshtriya, neither saw any reason to be known by their vocation but their birth was and is their Pahechan or identity.

Drona is Brahmin not only by birth but also by his natural instincts. The teacher has to know all skills … otherwise how will he teach different skills to children ? So, only being an exceptional warrior doesn’t put him in the category of a Kshatriya. Who taught the dhanurvidyaa to children in Ashrama ? The Brahmin teacher. Bhishmapitaamah is basically a warrior … he was never a teacher.

Actually, what I feel that in the past, it might not make any difference whether you apply varna by birth theory or varna by inherent instinct (guana) … I don’t know. Perhaps, God used to decide births in that way in those times. It is quite possible that during the time of Mahabhaarta, this was the accepted theory in the society. However, that doesn’t prove that it was correct or had the sanction of God Himself. May be, Mahabharata war could have never taken place if Arjuna would not have ridiculed & humiliated Karna as Sootputra.

When we read BG chapter 1 & see Arjuna expressing his great fear of births of varnashankaras etc. … why Krishna downplays it and doesn’t consider it a fit question to be answered at all ?? Why ?
OM

Ganeshprasad
21 March 2010, 06:46 PM
Pranam devotee ji



How is the child to be trained & when ? Who can decide it better than his Guru ? Let Guru decide whether he has to be trained as a Brahmin, a Khastriya, a Vaishya or a ShUdra. Perhaps the question which bothers you is how do you identify these traits at such early stage of life ?

No my friend non of the question bothers me. First let me correct you, however unpalatable it may sound, sudra had no formal traing in gurukul. Only three varna had upnayana sanskara given. A Brahmin receives this sanskara at the age of 8, kshatriya at 11, and vaisya at 12.
Please let us not have our personal opinion cloud our judgment, if you can provide any scripture evidence contrarily to what I have quoted please do so.



See, the Brahmin is the highest state ... and unless the desired laskhanas are clearly visible, the training as Brahmin can wait. He has to learn many other traits of other varnas & that itself will take considerable time. The child should be with Guru for 25 years of age & Guru may decide at what stage a child is so exceptional that he is fit to be trained as a Brahmin.


Here again you are speculating. When a boy receive upanaya sansar that when the gayatri is given and only consideration of giving this sansar is the Gotra of the pupil, after that training in respective varna begins and for a Brahmin boy it begins between 5to 8 years.
If you are able to site any example that Guru having given gayatri to a Brahmin boy but declared him any different varna please give example.



In fact, the brahminhood should be the highest degree that should be conferred on a student. At the time of passing out, the Guru would declare a student as a Brahmin, a Kshatriya, a Vaishya or a ShUdra … depending upon their academic performance. Just imagine, if that is done, how perfect our society will be.

Wow, I don’t think you have understood how it was in the olden days, you are making your judgement based on today’s sorry state of the varna. Nor do you understand the implications of your recipe.
 
 


Ah ! That is not due to varna but due to caste system. The system is prevalent in non-Hindus too. The rich and poor always lives different colonies. There is no question of separation of family members. Every Varna is respectable ... why should we need separation at all ?

Well that’s how it was, they had separate areas, a Brahmin would not eat or drink from another varna, you are proposing in a same household different varna living, so can you imaging father saying to his son sorry mate I cant eat at your food you are not a Brahmin, ah! I can’t merry you a Brahmin girl, how do I arrange your marriage I don’t know any other varna. what is our ancestry would be, son we have no kula how can we? it could any one of the four.



Quote:
It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.
I fully agree with Lord Krishna. One should be trained in an occupation which comes natural to his gunas acquired by birth. It doesn’t support Varna by birth theory.

We certainly are reading it differently



Quote:
You are proposing a change can happen yet Krishna is against it.
There is no verse from Krishna in BG supporting that Krishna even recognizes varna by birth theory.

What kind of answer is this, you had suggested varna can change like you would change nappies but I said in Chapter 18 Sri Krishna was talking about duties of Varnas. If you are kshatriya, then it is better to do kshatriya darma even poorly than brahmana darma perfectly.
 
 
 


What would happen if we have a Kshatriya who is afraid to fight, A Brahmin who is dumb-headed, a Vaishya who has knowledge of all the Vedas but cannot be a good trader, a ShUdra who is a great fighter ?

Good question, Dhitrasra was unfit to be a king yet he inharited the kingdom, a vaishya even if he was a learned guy he would still be counting money.
if a Brahmin or kshtriya or any one who did not live up to the standard, by all intend and purpose he is just that varna in name only and has to live with the shame of it and face the conscious at the end of his life. Take for instance ashvasthama he is refered as Brahmin by Drupadi even after his heinous act.
 


Or Gautam Buddha as a warrior ?? Krishna himself was a yadava by birth … he had no need to learn to fight as a Kshatriya & never try to teach anyone like a Brahmana … but he fought as a great warrior in wars & even taught highest philosophy to Arjuna … why didn’t he keep himself busy in milking cows & selling the milk and milk products ?

You need to take care and not mistake yadavas for cowherds, if you research you will find yadayas are kshtriya
 


Quote:
After taking such a birth, O Arjuna, one regains the knowledge acquired in the previous life, and strives again to achieve perfection. (6.43)
Perfectly correct ! How does it support the Varna by birth theory ?

You need to read previous verse and contemplate, also to understand that our birth in certain family is not random occurrence or accident.
 


Tell me one thing, Ganeshprasad ji, all your fathers’ children as you know them today should have been trained only the occupation as decided by their birth to certain family or as decided by their intellectual capabilities and natural instincts ? Think of your children, your friends’ and relatives’ children and you will realize that varna by birth theory could have done irreparable damage to those children and to the society.

I really do not understand what you are on about.



If varna by birth theory is correct and supported by God Himself, then it must apply to all races, in all times and in all lands. It is certainly not so.


Other then the four varna there always were different class of people in the world like malecha and yavanas what to talk about them even in the time of Ram there were adivasi belonging to no varna why is that you will have to ask God for that.but in Vedic society that is how it was.
 
 


Drona is Brahmin not only by birth but also by his natural instincts. The teacher has to know all skills … otherwise how will he teach different skills to children ? So, only being an exceptional warrior doesn’t put him in the category of a Kshatriya. Who taught the dhanurvidyaa to children in Ashrama ? The Brahmin teacher. Bhishmapitaamah is basically a warrior … he was never a teacher.

Drona had no business fighting in a war yet he did, did not change his status, Bhismapita was a kshatriya by birth yet he had wisdom better then a Brahmin yet he was known as Kshatriya, do you not see the point?



Actually, what I feel that in the past, it might not make any difference whether you apply varna by birth theory or varna by inherent instinct (guana) … I don’t know. Perhaps, God used to decide births in that way in those times. It is quite possible that during the time of Mahabhaarta, this was the accepted theory in the society. However, that doesn’t prove that it was correct or had the sanction of God Himself. May be, Mahabharata war could have never taken place if Arjuna would not have ridiculed & humiliated Karna as Sootputra.

There are a lots of if, buts and may be, and if it was true (which I believe it was) why do you think that parampara would not be carried forward?



When we read BG chapter 1 & see Arjuna expressing his great fear of births of varnashankaras etc. … why Krishna downplays it and doesn’t consider it a fit question to be answered at all ?? Why ?
OM

I am not going to speculate

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
21 March 2010, 10:52 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasadji,



First let me correct you, however unpalatable it may sound, sudra had no formal traing in gurukul. Only three varna had upnayana sanskara given. A Brahmin receives this sanskara at the age of 8, kshatriya at 11, and vaisya at 12.

Agreed. But that is what was happening. Does it prove that it was sanctioned by God ?


Here again you are speculating. When a boy receive upanaya sansar that when the gayatri is given and only consideration of giving this sansar is the Gotra of the pupil, after that training in respective varna begins and for a Brahmin boy it begins between 5to 8 years.
If you are able to site any example that Guru having given gayatri to a Brahmin boy but declared him any different varna please give example.

You are again talking of the caste system that was prevalent in the society. You didn't ask me what was happening in what time. You asked me what should happen and when.


Wow, I don’t think you have understood how it was in the olden days, you are making your judgement based on today’s sorry state of the varna. Nor do you understand the implications of your recipe.

"Olden days" --- how much old history is known to you for sure ? No one can say that this was the exact history after a lapse of more than 1000 years. People are not sure even for 200-300 years back and here we are claiming for more than 5000 years of history !


Nor do you understand the implications of your recipe.

This remark has condescending overtones. I didn't expect it from you. If you think I am so dumb that I don't understand the implications of what I am saying then there is no point in engaging me in a discussion.


Well that’s how it was, they had separate areas, a Brahmin would not eat or drink from another varna, you are proposing in a same household different varna living, so can you imaging father saying to his son sorry mate I cant eat at your food you are not a Brahmin, ah! I can’t merry you a Brahmin girl, how do I arrange your marriage I don’t know any other varna. what is our ancestry would be, son we have no kula how can we? it could any one of the four.

For being so sure ... please make sure that what you say existed in Hindu society even more than 5000 years ago. Are you sure ?


What kind of answer is this, you had suggested varna can change like you would change nappies

This again is not my words. Did I say this ?


I said in Chapter 18 Sri Krishna was talking about duties of Varnas. If you are kshatriya, then it is better to do kshatriya darma even poorly than brahmana darma perfectly.

Please show me even one verse which says that son of a Brahmin should work only as a Brahmin ... or son of a Kshatriya should only work as a Kshatriya ?
 
[qyuote]Take for instance ashvasthama he is refered as Brahmin by Drupadi even after his heinous act. [/quote]

Did I ask a quote from Draupadi or anyone like that ? Please quote Lord Krishna from BG.


You need to take care and not mistake yadavas for cowherds, if you research you will find yadayas are kshtriya

You should not think that the person you are discussing with has no knowledge. Please read history & find out how the so called "Kshatriya caste was manipulated" in the past. If Yadavas was Kshatriyas, then we need to redefine Vaishya and Kshatriya varna again.  


You need to read previous verse and contemplate, also to understand that our birth in certain family is not random occurrence or accident.
 
This is no way to discuss. You are giving verdict that only you are capable of understanding the verses correctly. If that is the attitude, why are we discussing it at all ? My dear friend, I cannot tell about you but I have read Gita like Newton's Laws of Motion for a a student of Mechanics .... not each and every verse but each and every word has been analysed thoroughly and understood.


I really do not understand what you are on about.

You may understand if you want to.


Other then the four varna there always were different class of people in the world like malecha and yavanas what to talk about them even in the time of Ram there were adivasi belonging to no varna why is that you will have to ask God for that.but in Vedic society that is how it was.
 
So, question is can a mlechha be a brahmin or a kshatriya or whatever ? If not, what should they do ? If they were also created by God ... by your logic everyone should work strictly according to either of the varnas he belongs to .... how these mlechhas & yavanas fit in there ? Was Lord Krishna God only the Hindus ?? 


Drona had no business fighting in a war yet he did, did not change his status, Bhismapita was a kshatriya by birth yet he had wisdom better then a Brahmin yet he was known as Kshatriya, do you not see the point?

I certainly see it differently.


There are a lots of if, buts and may be, and if it was true (which I believe it was) why do you think that parampara would not be carried forward?

Because this will certainly lead us to hell.

BTW, keeping in view your sentiments in your last post, I quit this discussion here.

OM

Ganeshprasad
22 March 2010, 05:56 AM
Pranam devotee ji



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=41717#post41717)
First let me correct you, however unpalatable it may sound, sudra had no formal training in gurukul. Only three varna had upnayana sanskara given. A Brahmin receives this sanskara at the age of 8, kshatriya at 11, and vaisya at 12.


Namaste Ganeshprasadji,



Agreed. But that is what was happening. Does it prove that it was sanctioned by God ?


That was and is the Vedic reality, sanction by God or not, he set up the varna system that much is clear.

Rest is our personal opinion which is proving to be difficult, not wishing to encroach on your feelings as well as a lot of people who find caste system a blot on Hindu Dharam,for which i bag your pardon.

I shall also desist from further discussion on this post as well as the forum, until i have completed my forthcoming pilgrimage, and hope fully atone for my trespasses.

Jai Shree Krishna

yajvan
23 March 2010, 10:26 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~


namasté


translation
"According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable."


I have little to contribute to this string, but thought to add the following from a past post:

Kṛṣṇa also tells us in the Bhāgavad gītā that at the core of the 4 fold order or division of society (cātur-varṇyaṁ) is based upon the 3 guṇa-s. That varṇa is the following: brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s.
One must ask if there are 3 guṇa-s how do you get 4 varṇa? It is based on the 3 guṇa-s primary and secondary combinations. We needn't go to the tertiary or 3rd level because if the 1st and 2nd levels are not possible, the 3 level will not matter.

1. Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
2. Sattva as primary and tamas as secondary

3. Rajas as primary and sattva as secondary
4. Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary

5. Tamas as primary and sattva as secondary
6. Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary

Note that the 2nd and 5th combinations are not possible due to the drastic contrast of sattva and tamas. This leaves us with 4 possible varṇa that align this way:

brahmaṇa-s : Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
kṣatriya-s : Rajas as primary and sattva as seconday
vaiśya-s : Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary
śudra-s : Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary I will assume there is a general knowledge of brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s and what they do, their roles in society and the like.

pranams

mukunda20
23 March 2010, 03:57 PM
Namaste Yajvanji and everyone,
thanks for valuable information.
One interesting point to note here is that before Sri Krishna introduces how He has created the Varnas based on nature of Gunas and Karma(chapter 4), He indicates that the ultimate goal of anyone is to transcend above the three Gunas itself in the sloka of Chapter 2- verse 45


trai-gunya-visaya veda
nistraigunyo bhavarjuna
nirdvandvo nitya-sattva-stho
niryoga-ksema atmavan
trai-gunya--pertaining to the three modes of material nature; visayah--on the subject matter; vedah--Vedic literatures; nistraigunyah--in a pure state of spiritual existence; bhava--be; arjuna--O Arjuna; nirdvandvah--free from the pains of opposites; nitya-sattva-sthah--ever remaining in sattva (goodness); niryoga-ksemah--free from (the thought of) acquisition and preservation; atma-van--established in the self.


It feels very simple while listening to Sri Krishna explaining it.

Best Regards,
mukunda

Nara
24 March 2010, 06:59 PM
Hello folks,

It is indeed interesting to see people get animated during a discussion on Varna. Up until about 50 or 60 years ago, not many people doubted scriptural basis for birth-based varna. However, with changing social mores and caste discrimination being increasingly equated to bigotry and backwardness, there is a concerted effort to find support from scriptures that Varna, as originally designed and practiced, was not birth based but only based on character and work. But, at the same time, Brahmins still continue to routinely proclaim birth-based lineage going all the way back to the Vedic sages.

I am now going to try and show that for all intents and purposes, Varna in both practice and scriptural theory, is birth based. Before I begin, a caveat is probably in order. As far as the extent to which actual facts can be gleaned from rigorous scientific inquiry, Varna and caste has not remained strictly insular. There is not a whole lot of genetic deviation among the various castes. The implication of whatever genetic differences and/or similarities discovered among the different castes, and among the populations from other regions of the world, is not clear cut. Leaving these aside, I would like to present evidence from Hindu scripture that the Varna system is a birth-based system, even during the Vedic times.

For the purpose of this presentation I will use evidence from Vedas, Ithihasas, and Smrithees. Specifically, I will present textual evidence from Rg Veda, Chandogya Upanishad, Srimat BG, Ramayana, Mahabharata, and actual practice among the Brahmin orthodoxy such as Brahminical religious institutions such as Shankara matam.

In this first post I am going to discuss Srimat BG. I will follow this up with more posts presenting evidence from other sources.

People who wish to argue that Varna is not birth based often cite selected verses here and there, in isolation, that do not refer to birth, and rest their case. An example of this tactic is to cite verse 4.13 where Lord Sri Krishna says the four varnas are his creation based on guna and karma.

But, even this verse does not say that varna is determined without any consideration to the biological birth status. Lord Sri Krishna’s declaration being the creator of the four varnas is not inconsistent with a birth-based varna system. Similarly, the claim that guna and karma determine one’s varna is also not inconsistent with a birth-based varna system. Since Lord Sri Krishna does not mention birth in this verse leaves whether varna is birth based or not is at best ambiguous. Therefore, one cannot simply cite this verse to conclusively claim it is not birth based.

The same ambiguity is present in the verses from Chapter 18. These verses only describe the gunas and karmas of the four varnas. But, strangely enough, these verses also refer to the gunas of the four varnas as स्वभावजम् (svabhAvajam). This means these gunas are natural to the individuals. So, one can deduce they are born with these svabahavas. Yet, one can claim varna may be determined at birth, but not by the varna of the parents. But at the very least we can conclude that there is nothing here that says anyone can adopt a varna and follow its karma, these are characteristics that appear naturally to the four varnas.

So, verses 4.13 and the verses of chapter 18, do not preclude a birth-based varna system.

Now, let us turn to verses 9.32 and 9.33. In these two verses Lord Sri Krishna is actually giving a positive message that everyone is eligible for his grace. That is good. But in the process of giving this positive message Lord Sri Krishna classifies people into two groups, one is people with birth resulting from papa and the second is people with birth resulting from punya. In the papa group are women, vaishya and Shudra. The punya group are the brahamanas and kshathriyas with bhakti. Lord Sri Krishna used the term papayoni for the furst group, which cannot mean anything other than by birth.

Also, all three orthodox commentators, namely, Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madhwa, have interpreted these two verses to mean women, vaishya and shudra birth result from papa. Here, there is no ambiguity, Lord Sri Krishna himself has clarified in these two verses that varna is birth based, just as much as gender is birth based.

Another interesting verse in this context is 3.35 in which Lord Sri Krishna puts down pursuing only svadarma even if performed improperly, than paradarma done well. In practical terms, svadarma and paradarma will be determined only by birth.

Turning to chapter 1, Arjuna describes how varna mixing will take place, and what the consequences will be of that, in verses 1.40 to 1.44. He says Varna mixing takes place when the women lose their sanctity. When this happens, Arjuna declares, jAti Darma perishes. Now, one might object that it is Arjuna who is saying this, not Lord Sri Krishna. Is this all you have to prove Varna is not based on birth, if Arjuna says it is not valid? Well, actually, Arjuna himself says he is not just making all this up, but this is what he has heard from the clan elders. So, this must have been widely held belief and practice at the time of Mahabarata.

In summary, in 4.13 Sri Krishna says he created the four varnas according to guna and karma, and in the verses from chapter 18 he describes the svabhava of the four varnas, and in the verses 9.32 and 9.33 he clearly declares the four varna manifest through birth. A brahmana is a brahmana if he is born into the brahmana varna, exhibit the brahmana gunas, and performs the brahamana karmas. Same with the other three varnas. All one can argue is birth alone does not result in a given varna, but birth is a necessary condition. This is what Yudishtra states to the Yaksha.

Cheers!

vivendi
24 March 2010, 09:27 PM
Hello folks,

It is indeed interesting to see people get animated during a discussion on Varna. Up until about 50 or 60 years ago, not many people doubted scriptural basis for birth-based varna. However, with changing social mores and caste discrimination being increasingly equated to bigotry and backwardness, there is a concerted effort to find support from scriptures that Varna, as originally designed and practiced, was not birth based but only based on character and work. But, at the same time, Brahmins still continue to routinely proclaim birth-based lineage going all the way back to the Vedic sages.

I am now going to try and show that for all intents and purposes, Varna in both practice and scriptural theory, is birth based.
You are correct. Sri Sri Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi confirms here (http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap2.htm) that varna is birth based and cannot be based on qualities. He has given a logical view why it is so.

But you are wrong on Sri Ramanuja. He says that varna is based on qualities of the person (http://www.hindu.com/fr/2004/04/30/stories/2004043001390600.htm) (http://www.hindu.com/fr/2004/04/30/stories/2004043001390600.htm%29). Also Sri Madhva says that varnas are based on the qualities of the soul and not by birth (http://bellurramki18.wordpress.com/2007/01/24/sri-madhvacharya-incarnation-of-mukhya-praana/) (http://bellurramki18.wordpress.com/2007/01/24/sri-madhvacharya-incarnation-of-mukhya-praana/%29).

So your claim that in recent times >>there is a concerted effort to find support from scriptures that Varna, as originally designed and practiced, was not birth based but only based on character and work.>> is incorrect.

devotee
24 March 2010, 09:51 PM
Thanks Vivendi for your good post !

However, it may not satisfy some souls here who have this strategy in mind :

a) First decide what you strongly feel is correct --- like Lord Krishna supports Varna by birth theory
b) Disregard or downplay which is not in favour of what you are going to prove (which you have already decided) and manipulate by supplying your own arguments --- like all verses spoken by Lord Krishna nowhere suggests any support to varna by birth theory ---- but who can stop you from supplying some extended arguments etc. & prove what you have in your mind ??

Again the tactics used here is : If it doesn't deny something then it must be supporting !! This is called great art of manipulation !!

Again in BG verses 9.32 or 9.33 ... where does Lord Krishna say that varna is by birth ?? But then people are quoting this as a great support !!

The reality is ---- You see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear.

OM

atanu
25 March 2010, 04:02 AM
Hello folks,

In summary, in 4.13 Sri Krishna says he created the four varnas according to guna and karma, and in the verses from chapter 18 he describes the svabhava of the four varnas, and in the verses 9.32 and 9.33 he clearly declares the four varna manifest through birth. A brahmana is a brahmana if he is born into the brahmana varna, exhibit the brahmana gunas, and performs the brahamana karmas. Same with the other three varnas. All one can argue is birth alone does not result in a given varna, but birth is a necessary condition. This is what Yudishtra states to the Yaksha.

Cheers!

Namaste Shri Nara,

I wish to point out a few things as I understand.

I think that Birth in a particular environment is not a necessary condition but is primarily a result. In Brahadaraynaka U., Yajnavalkya takes another sage aside and discusses certain things in private. What they finally disclose is that karma karma karma.

When Shri Krishna says: 'I am the author of chatur varna' or the Rig Veda verse wherein the caste divisions are shown as Purusha's body, to me it is pointer that all castes (or actually varna-inherent colour) has a single source and that single source is worthy of worship. Second, Shri Krishna also says that "I ensure birth in a favouable kula for those who abide in dharma (approximate paraphrasing). Shri Krishna also talks of yogi who sees only sameness. Manisha Panchikam teaches of sameness. On the other hand, there is example how ekalvya was removed from the scene for not being a khatriya.

It is a cyclical event. Birth gives an environment for certain path, karma further ripens the future proclivity and it goes on. Thus birth does surely indicate the past propensities as well as effect pf past work. Taking a holistic view, there is no cause for grudge nor is there any cause to feel superior. If I had acquired expertise of leading a big Industrial house, then possibly I would have had a birth that would be conducive for that purpose. The varna division is general -- Thinkers-Artists-Teachers, Leaders-Warriors, Business People, and common men who have to support. There is no discrimination in this when one sees the big picture.

Lastly, I will re-iterate that holding a grudge, feeling superior or inferior, and inciting unrest -- all are indicative of deficient understanding. Actually it is for the individual to keep himself OK.

These are my opinions only.

Om Namah Shivaya

grames
25 March 2010, 04:52 AM
Just my two cents...

Jati is most of the time taken same as Varna which is not true in my opinion. Jati is what you get in to or acquire by birth and not Varna. Varna is classification of 'Soul' based on the influence of the three fold qualities of Sattva, raja and Tamo and this is what Lord Krshna says He created. If this understanding is not taken serious, Lord Krshna's word will be very confusing and meaningless. Also, we will not have any shastraic meaning to demonic souls getting birth in to Brahmical parents and vice versa. SvaDharma is foolishly equated as JatiDharma by neos for their selfish motives of protecting Vedic life to only few groups of people and it is very much against the vedic dharma where everyone is suppose to follow the Dharma. SvaDharma is VarnaDharma and we can state numerous examples of great Rshis and MahaJanas who are not born in to Brahminical Jati but belong to Brahamana varna and also examples for the opposite.

Its all dishonesty and God is only for me and Veda are my ancestors property is the root cause of this fallen faith of Varna by birth. If Jati is translated as Caste of the body, Varana should be translated as caste of the Soul. Improper use of the english word "caste" to equate both soul and body as same is only ignorance and anything built on top of this ignorance is only selfish idiotic.

smaranam
25 March 2010, 09:47 AM
I think that Birth in a particular environment is not a necessary condition but is primarily a result. In Brahadaraynaka U., Yajnavalkya takes another sage aside and discusses certain things in private. What they finally disclose is that karma karma karma.

When Shri Krishna says: 'I am the author of chatur varna' or the Rig Veda verse wherein the caste divisions are shown as Purusha's body, to me it is pointer that all castes (or actually varna-inherent colour) has a single source and that single source is worthy of worship. Second, Shri Krishna also says that "I ensure birth in a favouable kula for those who abide in dharma (approximate paraphrasing). Shri Krishna also talks of yogi who sees only sameness. Manisha Panchikam teaches of sameness. On the other hand, there is example how ekalvya was removed from the scene for not being a khatriya.

It is a cyclical event. Birth gives an environment for certain path, karma further ripens the future proclivity and it goes on. Thus birth does surely indicate the past propensities as well as effect pf past work. Taking a holistic view, there is no cause for grudge nor is there any cause to feel superior. If I had acquired expertise of leading a big Industrial house, then possibly I would have had a birth that would be conducive for that purpose. The varna division is general -- Thinkers-Artists-Teachers, Leaders-Warriors, Business People, and common men who have to support. There is no discrimination in this when one sees the big picture.

Lastly, I will re-iterate that holding a grudge, feeling superior or inferior, and inciting unrest -- all are indicative of deficient understanding. Actually it is for the individual to keep himself OK.

These are my opinions only.

Om Namah Shivaya

I think this one was one of the best :goodpost:

Perhaps the automatic karma system itself is the dharma system in the light of the modern world ?

Identifying what is the cause and what is the effect, and distinguishing that from the goodness involved in the stronger sections helping the weaker sections, also setting an example, gives rise to no oppressions. This also feeds back into the cause and effect karma cycle.

And, occupation being passed down from great-grandpa to great-grandson worked really well in the days it did, to re-enforce this. It was basically a good fit for civilization in those days. However, we are now way into Kali Yuga.

Perhaps , despite the known and expected effects of Kali Yuga, this is really a No-OP for humans. Therein lies the beauty of Brahman like a lotus in swamp.

i.e. humans need not do anything, like political interference. We need equal access for all , not quotas.
If all humans just abide by dharma and samskAr , prakrti will take care of the rest.
And dharma includes being compassionate.

The Lord is accessible to all and only wants Love of the individual - this means Universal Love.

I think , the issue of sAmAjic access for all, and access to visit temple or kirtan and spiritual education for all, was the good reform of the bhakti movement, and has nothing to do with the home samskAr and dharma, varNa and jAti of individuals and families which definitely have their place in the scheme of things. Also, this results in everyone benefiting by trying to be better and better individuals thus automatically working on their guNa and karma.

BG 6.40: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Son of Pṛthā, a transcendentalist engaged in auspicious activities does not meet with destruction either in this world or in the spiritual world; one who does good, My friend, is never overcome by evil.

BG 6.41: The unsuccessful yogī, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people, or into a family of rich aristocracy.

BG 6.42: Or [if unsuccessful after long practice of yoga] he takes his birth in a family of transcendentalists who are surely great in wisdom. Certainly, such a birth is rare in this world.


Engaging in auspicious activity seems to be the Universal key.

Jai Shri KRSNa

devotee
25 March 2010, 10:04 AM
Namaste Grames,

Thanks for your nice post !


;
Jati is most of the time taken same as Varna which is not true in my opinion. Jati is what you get in to or acquire by birth and not Varna. Varna is classification of 'Soul' based on the influence of the three fold qualities of Sattva, raja and Tamo and this is what Lord Krshna says He created.

Jati word has come from "Ja" i.e. birth. So, one's "jati" is decided by his/her birth. This birth to a certain parents, kula, place & conditions etc. are certainly influenced by his past karma which is what Lord Krishna says in BG 6.41 and 6.42.


If this understanding is not taken serious, Lord Krshna's word will be very confusing and meaningless. Also, we will not have any shastraic meaning to demonic souls getting birth in to Brahmical parents and vice versa.

Exactly ! Whatever Shastras say should be match what is happening in the real world otherwise the Shastras would lose their authenticity. If we accept the varnas are decided once for all at the time of birth .... then the BG verse 18.41 cannot stand the test of the real world. Lord Krishna clearly says that the Karmas (this karma is not the past karma but is used in the sense of Dharma i.e. meaning what the people are supposed to do) of the four varnas are decided based on their naturally acquired gunas. It means that every person born in a certain varna must be born with certain gunas. Our experience tells us very clearly that the gunas acquired by a person doesn't depend upon in which caste he is born.


SvaDharma is foolishly equated as JatiDharma by neos for their selfish motives of protecting Vedic life to only few groups of people and it is very much against the vedic dharma where everyone is suppose to follow the Dharma. SvaDharma is VarnaDharma and we can state numerous examples of great Rshis and MahaJanas who are not born in to Brahminical Jati but belong to Brahamana varna also examples for the opposite.

You are right.


Its all dishonesty and God is only for me and Veda are my ancestors property is the root cause of this fallen faith of Varna by birth. If Jati is translated as Caste of the body, Varana should be translated as caste of the Soul. Improper use of the english word "caste" to equate both soul and body as same is only ignorance and anything built on top of this ignorance is only selfish idiotic.

Yes. It is due to the selfish attitude of certain group of people in the past who manipulated our shastras like Manusmriti to equate varnas with caste by birth.

If this is really true, then how can we explain Vajrashoochika Upanishad which rejects the idea of varna by birth theory in no uncertain terms ? What was the varna of the great Rishi Vedvyaas or Maharishi Parashar ... what was the castes/varnas of their mothers ?

OM

smaranam
25 March 2010, 12:11 PM
J If Jati is translated as Caste of the body, Varana should be translated as caste of the Soul.

Namaste

Perhaps. That's very interesting , Gramesji.
So, appearantly, in the 'olden days' , the caste of the body and caste of the soul fit together very well. But that was not the mandate given by shAstra ? As times changed, hanging on to this as a mandate is probably the error ?

So, this means , the error in perception , as always, is not seperating or mixing up the material from the spiritual. ShAstra from socio-economic infrastructure , even if it was setup based on shAstra to begin with.

Its no wonder that it feels complicated, but not once we find the error.

What i liked about Atanuji's post is, that he points out that its a hand-in-hand chicken-and-egg phenomenon. GuNa cultivation and karma brings a particular birth, and birth provides an environment for future guNa karma.
Nature and nurture, chicken and egg.


So what now ? Nothing! We just do good and be good and prakrti takes care of the rest. Is it not so ?

The Karma system is automatically the Dharma system.
Let infrasturctures be. Let people be.
Let material stay material and spiritual stay spiritual.

This is how the shAstra, scriptures will apply , whether it is SatYug KaliYug or any other Genetic engineering or Singularity Yug.


Jai Shri KRSNa

Nara
25 March 2010, 12:19 PM
Hello folks, Greetings!

Before I move to the next post on scriptural basis for birth based varna let me try to answer some of the reactions to my first post.

First, all of us come to a discussion forum with a POV. We need to make our case with proper evidence and logic. Simply asserting you are wrong won’t do, show me the evidence. Vivendi, what if I just say you are wrong, where will we be? Let us not make this into a food fight.

vivendi, you have given a newspaper article praising Bhagavat Ramanuja. I have no problem with that. He was a great reformer, he wanted people of all varna to be treated with respect, and I love him with all my heart for that, but even for him Varna was birth based. He was told it was so by many including a Vaishya he respected dearly. In any case, let me just give you the original text from Sri Ramanuja Gita Bhashya for verse #9.32 and 9.33.
स्त्रियो वैश्याः शूद्राः च पापयोनयः आपि मां व्यापाश्रित्य परां जतिं यान्ति ।
किं पुनः पुण्ययोनयो ब्राह्मणाः राजर्ष्यः च मद्भ्क्तिम्आश्रिताः । अतः त्वं राजर्षिः अस्थिरं तापत्रयाभिहततया असुखं च इमं लोकं प्राप्य वर्तमानो मां भजस्व ॥

Rough translation: Women, Vaishya, and Shudra are of papa birth (papayonayaha), even they can reach the ultimate state by surrendering to me. What is more, Brahmanas and Rajarishees are of birth resulting from punya (puNya yonayaha) and are firmly devoted bhaktas. Therefore, you being a raja rishi, have come to me to escape this unhappy and changing world affected by the three-fold afflictions.
I don’t have direct quotes from Madwacharya bhashyam, but I know Dwaitam asserts varna not just for the body, but for the soul as well.

Jati is for body, varna is for soul, says grames. Only followers of Madwacharya assign varna to soul. Other orthodox schools hold jivas to be all equal, free of gender or varna. Leaving that aside, Arjuna states in Chapter 1, on the authority of clan elders, that mixing of varna will result in the annihilation of jAti darma. He uses the two terms, varna and jati, interchangeably. If varna is only for soul, then how would varna sankra come about? If Varna and jati are completely different, why did the clan elders tell Arjuna, as Arjuna claims, that Varna sankara will result in the destruction of Jati darma? What is the connection?

Devotee, I am going to answer your objections without making any comment about you or your motives or anything like that. I ask you to show me the same courtesy, nothing more, and nothing less.

Nothing in verses 4.13, 18.40-45, 3.35, rejects the possibility that varna is birth based. They do not talk about birth at all, so no claim can be made one way or another. I have explained this in detail in my first post. If you think those verses preclude any possibility for birth to play a role in one's varna, show the evidence and logic of that view.

In 9.32 and 9.33, Lord Sri Krishna specifically says women, vaishya, and shudra are of sinful birth. He uses the term “papa yoni”. Yoni is what? It refers to source, origin, decent, or female reproductive organ. How can this not be related to birth? All the three great acharyas, and one Ramakrishna Mutt publication give this interpretation only. I am just presenting what they are saying. If you think I am just seeing what I want to see and hear, then these great stalwarts are also doing the same thing.

Now it is time for you to respond without epithets, don’t just say I am this or I am that, put up your best evidence and logic.

Cheers!

devotee
25 March 2010, 01:24 PM
Dear Mr Nara,


In any case, let me just give you the original text from Sri Ramanuja Gita Bhashya for verse #9.32 and 9.33.
स्त्रियो वैश्याः शूद्राः च पापयोनयः आपि मां व्यापाश्रित्य परां जतिं यान्ति ।
किं पुनः पुण्ययोनयो ब्राह्मणाः राजर्ष्यः च मद्भ्क्तिम्आश्रिताः । अतः त्वं राजर्षिः अस्थिरं तापत्रयाभिहततया असुखं च इमं लोकं प्राप्य वर्तमानो मां भजस्व ॥
[INDENT]Rough translation: Women, Vaishya, and Shudra are of papa birth (papayonayaha), even they can reach the ultimate state by surrendering to me. What is more, Brahmanas and Rajarishees are of birth resulting from punya (puNya yonayaha) and are firmly devoted bhaktas. Therefore, you being a raja rishi, have come to me to escape this unhappy and changing world affected by the three-fold afflictions.

May I ask, who has done this "rough" translation ? Please read the sanskrit text of Ramanuja Gita Bhasya quoted by you. It says, "Stri, vaishyah, Shudra cha paapyonyah api" ====> this should be translated as women, vaishya, Shudras and Paapyonih & not as paayonih e.g. women, vaishyas & Shudras. So I am curious to know where you got this "rough translation from !



Nothing in verses 4.13, 18.40-45, 3.35, rejects the possibility that varna is birth based. They do not talk about birth at all, so no claim can be made one way or another. I have explained this in detail in my first post. If you think those verses preclude any possibility for birth to play a role in one's varna, show the evidence and logic of that view.

If someone doesn't say anything against Caste system, that means he supports caste system ? What sort of a logic is this ? I am not saying of this possibility or that possibility. Why take support of these verses when they don't say anything in support of Varna by birth system ?


In 9.32 and 9.33, Lord Sri Krishna specifically says women, vaishya, and shudra are of sinful birth.

Please read the verse carefully. 9.32 doesn't say specifically that women, vaishyas and Shudras are paayonis. It mentions paapyonis (paapyonyah), women, vaishyas and the shudras. It is nothing more than an extrapolation that paapyoni in the above verse is used for women, vaishyas and Shudras. Please read the verse & try explaining to me where it states "paapyonyah i.e. women, vaishyas & shudras" ?? There is no word there for "i.e." or "e.g." in that verse.

Yes, some great achaaryas did translate this verse in this manner, I agree. But they belonged to an era where it might be difficult to see one's jaati different from one's varna .... so that doesn't bother me. However, I am surprised that a knowledgeable person like you wants to accept this ... why ?


He uses the term “papa yoni”. Yoni is what? It refers to source, origin, decent, or female reproductive organ. How can this not be related to birth? All the three great acharyas, and one Ramakrishna Mutt publication give this interpretation only. I am just presenting what they are saying. If you think I am just seeing what I want to see and hear, then these great stalwarts are also doing the same thing.

You claim that you know Sanskrit. Why are you trying to take shelter under someone else's translation ? As I told in the above para, please translate on your own & see. When it comes to Saguna Brahman then you don't accept what the achaaryas say & when it comes to bashing up Hindu Dharma for Varna system, you start taking shelter under their translations ??

So, am I wrong in concluding that you are trying to find out one reason or the other to bash up Hindu Dharma ?

OM

atanu
25 March 2010, 02:10 PM
Hello folks, Greetings!


I don’t have direct quotes from Madwacharya bhashyam, but I know Dwaitam asserts varna not just for the body, but for the soul as well.

Jati is for body, varna is for soul, says grames. Only followers of Madwacharya assign varna to soul. Other orthodox schools hold jivas to be all equal, free of gender or varna. Leaving that aside, Arjuna states in Chapter 1, on the authority of clan elders, that mixing of varna will result in the annihilation of jAti darma. He uses the two terms, varna and jati, interchangeably. If varna is only for soul, then how would varna sankra come about? If Varna and jati are completely different, why did the clan elders tell Arjuna, as Arjuna claims, that Varna sankara will result in the destruction of Jati darma? What is the connection?

Cheers!

Namaste Shri Nara and Devotee

jAti birth , production, fixed by birth ; position assigned by birth , rank , caste , family , race , lineage etc.


varNa a covering , cloak , mantle ; a cover , lid ; outward appearance , exterior , form , figure , shape , colour

There is definite difference between varNa and jAti; the former being the cause and the latter being the result. Again, varNa depends on karma in a particular station (jAti).

I also think that the statement of Shri Nara shown in blue above has a confusion of jiva and jivAtman. Jiva, I think, is Purusha (jivAtman) conditioned in a particular way by prakriti. In other words, varna is prakritic veiling of jivAtman by different colours that differentiates jivAtman, into many jivas. If jiva-s were all same, sexless and equal, then how we all are different?

In respect of Gita verse 9.32, however, I must agree that most traditional and modern translators seem to say what Shri Nara is saying. But that does not prove exact equivalence of jAti and varNa. On the contrary, it appears to say that accrued karma determines ambience of future birth.

Om Namah Shivaya

vivendi
25 March 2010, 03:24 PM
Pranams Nara, thanks. I was not aware of this interpretation. Let me check with a SV scholar and perhaps get back to you if anything is different. I find it difficult to accept your derivation of Shri Ramanuja in that if he said all jivas are equal, then he should not be interpreting the verses to suggest that women, vaishyas and shudras are papa yonah aka sinful birth.

Nara
25 March 2010, 03:31 PM
devotee,


May I ask, who has done this "rough" translation ?

The translation is mine. Since it is mine, I cannot rest on it as proof positive, I agree. But you translated only the first verse, not the the entire passage. In his commentary for the second verse Ramanuja leaves no room for alternative translations. He states clearly that Brahmana and Rajrishi births are punya yonayaha.

Another factor that you are ignoring is the fact that Lord Sri Krishna classifies people into two groups, (i) women, vaishya who are papayonees in my opinion and women, vaishya and papayonees per yours, and (ii) the brahamna and kshatriya, and bhathas who are punya yonees. The word yoni here connects varna to birth.

Your argument that those acharyas lived in a different era and we now need to reinterpret these verses only goes to strengthen what I have been saying. Even otherwise, we are engaged in understanding varna as presented in Hindu scriptures, not how it should be understood in our times. In our times we must annihilate varna and caste altogether, but that is a different topic for a different thread.



If someone doesn't say anything against Caste system, that means he supports caste system ? What sort of a logic is this ?That would be illogical indeed, but that is not what I am saying, nor do the verses. Please see below.



..... Why take support of these verses when they don't say anything in support of Varna by birth system ? I am not taking support from these verses at all. On the contrary this verse is usually cited in favor of the claim that varna is not birth based. The originator of this thread cited this verse. All I am saying is these verses do not lend support to either position, mine or yours, that is all.


....So, am I wrong in concluding that you are trying to find out one reason or the other to bash up Hindu Dharma ?Yes devotee, you are wrong. I am not trying to bash anything or anyone up. I think Varna system is a blot on Hinduism. An honest appraisal of it and making amends will only strengthen Hinduism. In the absence of such forthright reckoning, it will continue to be burdened by it.

Cheers!

Nara
25 March 2010, 04:02 PM
atanu, greetings!


...There is definite difference between varNa and jAti; They may be different, but are related. There are many jatis within each varna. In this respect, many orthodox people use jAti and varna interchangeably.


...If jiva-s were all same, sexless and equal, then how we all are different?
atanu, this is a tangential issue, not relevant to the main point of discussion. So I would like to keep this brief with no further exchanges. If you would like a more elaborate discussion we can probably have one elsewhere.

My point was limited to pointing out that except Madhwacharya followers, the others hold that jivas or jivathaman or whatever terminology we may use, is devoid of varna.

Cheers!

TatTvamAsi
25 March 2010, 10:07 PM
The reality is ---- You see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear.

OM

Namaste Devotee,

What you have stated is absolutely brilliant! That is very much the case indeed.

However, regarding varnA, as clearly stated in the article of Shankaracharya (Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati of Sankara Mutt) in Vivendi's post, one has to be clear about what varnA is, its original purpose, and how it is applied in the modern day. You know very well that today caste is being abused by everybody. This is clearly not the fault of the system right?

Why is there a doubt as to whether someone is born into a particular varnA? As GaneshPrasad stated, how can one, a Brahmin boy for example, have his upanayana at the age of 5 - 8 when his "guna" and "karma" are literally 'blank'? What is the meaning of upanayana anyway? If one's varnA is not based on birth, how can we determine what one's svAdharmA is? It cannot be constantly changing as likes, dislikes, tendencies, habits, and even character varies.

Like you stated in another post, just because one is in a particular varnA, it does NOT mean they have to be abusive to others. It has happened and that is bad, but to try to redefine the system or read into it in a way that will make it fit modern thinking is going too far isn't it?

Anyway, since we have already made up our minds, I suppose this is rather fruitless but at least the facts must be mentioned for everyone to see.

Namaskar.

TatTvamAsi
25 March 2010, 10:15 PM
What was the varna of the great Rishi Vedvyaas or Maharishi Parashar ... what was the castes/varnas of their mothers ?

OM

Namaste Devotee,

A quick note on the statement above.

The Gotra always passes through the father and NOT the mother. Hence, both those examples are BRAHMINS because the fathers of both were rSis.

Namaskar.

atanu
25 March 2010, 10:29 PM
atanu, greetings
They may be different, but are related. There are many jatis within each varna. In this respect, many orthodox people use jAti and varna interchangeably.


Namaste nara

That is wrong. Isn't it? To put manifestation before cause. To put matter before spirit. A spiritual teaching that there are different colourations in Purusha's body itself, from which flows the varna differences is mis-utilised as an exploitation tool and mis-utilised by the opposite group for retaliation. A woman is probably nothing but a man who in his last incarnation exploited or wronged a woman or lusted after a woman's form. A sudra again is probably a fallen Brahmin.

It is like this. Though all religions teach that God is one and mankind is one but their adherants seem not to agree to that and vouch for superiority of present form/name of own self or own group, argue, do violence, and kill in the name of differences. This is the play of evil tamasic-rajasic nature despite the presence of religious scripture that teaches the sattwik component. That is the tarattamma in nature. Scripture makes us aware of it.




atanu, this is a tangential issue, not relevant to the main point of discussion. So I would like to keep this brief with no further exchanges. If you would like a more elaborate discussion we can probably have one elsewhere
My point was limited to pointing out that except Madhwacharya followers, the others hold that jivas or jivathaman or whatever terminology we may use, is devoid of varna.


Actually, I feel that such differences of understanding are cause of problems and thus are vital. But I will go by your statement and will request you to kindly elaborate in simple terms the difference between jiva and jiva atman -- by pm or in a different thread.

No Indian Guru, traditional or modern, will use varna knowledge in terms of exploitation. It is the rajasic-tamasic nature that upholds differences as permanent and sanctions the exploitation etc.

I have received from a respected member the following teaching of Satya Sai baba.

"Of course, it is a fact that the system has veered from the proper path and taken to moving in wrong directions. This has been noted by many great men. But that cannot be sufficient reason to throw it overboard. For the reason that the leg is doing the work of the hand, and that the head is performing the function of the feet, it is not advisable to cut off hands and feet. Attempts have to be made to set things right, rather than destroying the very system itself.

The Varna system is not the cause of all this confusion and unrest. The fault lies more in the haphazard manner in which it has developed. It became a plaything in the hands of all types of people. So it lost its original symmetry and harmony. This system is essential, not merely for Bharath, but even for the world. In countries outside India this system is not absent. The name may be different, the working is the same. There also there are four classes—the Sikshaka Varga (Teachers), the Rakshaka Varga (Kings), the Vanig Varga (Businessmen) and the Sramika Varga (Servants). But in Bharath, the Vargas are decided by birth. In other parts of the world, they are decided by karma, the work each is engaged in. That is the distinction.

Now, among the Brahmins who have been honoured by being established in the very first cadre, many can be found who have left off the path and strayed into mean ways. So too, in the fourth Varna, the Sudras, many can be found who are moved by holy ideals, high spiritual aspirations, and who are striving to attain purity of mind as a means of realisation. Just because these things are possible, it is not proper to conclude that the Varna organisation of human society is useless.” (SSB, Gita Vahini)"

I mention that Sri Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati or Sri Ramana Maharshi do not speak any different. In fact Kanchi Paramacharya says, quoting Vyasdeva: sudra sadhuh, kali sadhuh.

In summary. We realise that varna categories in jagat are eternal and it is our interaction and karma in jagat which evolves/degrades the varna that covers the original transparent mind.

It is not a sanction to exploit a woman or a sudra, since that is the papa that will lead one to a so-called sudra birth. On the other hand, Shri Krishna teaches that simple devotion to God will free even such people who have so-called sinful birth.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
25 March 2010, 10:58 PM
Namaste Devotee,

What you have stated is absolutely brilliant! That is very much the case indeed.

However, regarding varnA, as clearly stated in the article of Shankaracharya (Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati of Sankara Mutt) in Vivendi's post, one has to be clear about what varnA is, its original purpose, and how it is applied in the modern day. You know very well that today caste is being abused by everybody. This is clearly not the fault of the system right?

Why is there a doubt as to whether someone is born into a particular varnA? As GaneshPrasad stated, how can one, a Brahmin boy for example, have his upanayana at the age of 5 - 8 when his "guna" and "karma" are literally 'blank'? What is the meaning of upanayana anyway? If one's varnA is not based on birth, how can we determine what one's svAdharmA is? It cannot be constantly changing as likes, dislikes, tendencies, habits, and even character varies.

Like you stated in another post, just because one is in a particular varnA, it does NOT mean they have to be abusive to others. It has happened and that is bad, but to try to redefine the system or read into it in a way that will make it fit modern thinking is going too far isn't it?

Anyway, since we have already made up our minds, I suppose this is rather fruitless but at least the facts must be mentioned for everyone to see.

Namaskar.


namaste TTA

Your writing is commendable here and it will not go waste. But IMO, this should be extended to the whole world, since the whole world is in Purusha.

In my opinion, the purpose of karma is to lighten the darkness of the veil called varNa that covers up the transparent sattwik mind.

Om namah Shivaya

atanu
25 March 2010, 11:13 PM
Pranams Nara, thanks. I was not aware of this interpretation. Let me check with a SV scholar and perhaps get back to you if anything is different. I find it difficult to accept your derivation of Shri Ramanuja in that if he said all jivas are equal, then he should not be interpreting the verses to suggest that women, vaishyas and shudras are papa yonah aka sinful birth.

Namaste vivendi

And that is why I also feel that one must understand the differences in words. I think jiva and jivAtman signify two different things. Atman is pure and same, but Jiva acquires a set of characteristics, depending on how Purusha (jivAtman, which as per Advaita is same as atman), is involved with Prakriti.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
25 March 2010, 11:32 PM
devotee,
---I am not trying to bash anything or anyone up. I think Varna system is a blot on Hinduism. An honest appraisal of it and making amends will only strengthen Hinduism. In the absence of such forthright reckoning, it will continue to be burdened by it.

Cheers!

Shri Nara

Do you mind my reforming the above a bit?

devotee
26 March 2010, 03:52 AM
Dear Nara,



The translation is mine. Since it is mine, I cannot rest on it as proof positive, I agree. But you translated only the first verse, not the the entire passage. In his commentary for the second verse Ramanuja leaves no room for alternative translations. He states clearly that Brahmana and Rajrishi births are punya yonayaha.

स्त्रियो वैश्याः शूद्राः च पापयोनयः आपि मां व्यापाश्रित्य परां जतिं यान्ति ।
किं पुनः पुण्ययोनयो ब्राह्मणाः राजर्ष्यः च मद्भ्क्तिम्आश्रिताः ।

The translation of the second verse is also not supporting your distorted meaning. “Kim punah” has been used in the above text and also in BG as a phrase, meaning, “What to say of”. Use of Punyayonha with Brahmana and Rajarishis doesn’t make it a qualifier of the two words. Again, “Punyayonayo” (punayayonayah) is used in plural number with Brahmana and Rajarshis, so it can’t have been used as a qualifier for both Brahmana and Rajarshis. It is very important to note here is that Rajarishis are never born as Rajarishis … this status is acquired by the great sage by his karma, gunas and jnana alone. Then why Rajarishis are clubbed together with the Brahmanas, if it supports “the varna by birth theory” ? So, it is clear that your meaning of the text is certainly distorted.

There is no denying the fact that Brahmin and Kashtriya as Varnas (not necessarily by birth) are certainly results of Punya karma i.e. both past and present karmas. In fact, the final goal of all karma is to become a Brahmin varna. However, your adding the word "births" after "Brahmana and Rajrishis" (highlighted by me) certainly helps to manipulate the meaning that suits you. Why did you add this word from your side ?


Another factor that you are ignoring is the fact that Lord Sri Krishna classifies people into two groups, (i) women, vaishya who are papayonees in my opinion and women, vaishya and papayonees per yours, and (ii) the brahamna and kshatriya, and bhathas who are punya yonees. The word yoni here connects varna to birth.

First of all, the paapyonis is not to be seen as a qualifier of the two words, as explained by me above. Again, please note that attaining the varna of a Brahmin or a Kashtriya is certainly a result of one’s punya karmas. Please also note that there is no use of punyayoni in the original verse of BG with Brahmana, Kshatriya and Bhaktas … so aren’t you putting your words in the mouth of Lord Krishna ?


Your argument that those acharyas lived in a different era and we now need to reinterpret these verses only goes to strengthen what I have been saying. Even otherwise, we are engaged in understanding varna as presented in Hindu scriptures, not how it should be understood in our times. In our times we must annihilate varna and caste altogether, but that is a different topic for a different thread.

I more or less agree with you (though I see a little differently). However, what I find from your posts that you are very happy attacking anything within Hinduism. May be I am wrong … but just think of it … why should I be biased against you or anyone here …. unless an impression of that sort is created by you alone through your posts ? Please forgive me, if I am wrong.


Yes devotee, you are wrong. I am not trying to bash anything or anyone up. I think Varna system is a blot on Hinduism. An honest appraisal of it and making amends will only strengthen Hinduism. In the absence of such forthright reckoning, it will continue to be burdened by it.

I will be very happy to learn that I am wrong on that account. I would ask for your forgiveness 100 times if I am really wrong.

I am with you for an honest appraisal but not a distorted one. First caste system cannot be stated to be vedic. And it is not the varna system which is wrong but the caste system prevailing in the society.

I shall give you scriptural and historical proofs of what I say i.e. the present caste system is not vedic, in my next post.

OM

devotee
26 March 2010, 04:04 AM
Namaste,

My position on caste and varna is very clear to all old members of this forum. I see varna system as created by God but caste system (by birth) as unvedic and a manipulation of varna system by the vested interests within Hindu society at a much later stage. Why do I say so ? I am giving the explanation below :

A) There is no mention of caste system or caste discrimination in the entire Rig Veda. The varna system comes in Purush Sukta but here also it doesn’t say that varna shall be decided by one’s birth alone.

One Rishi of the Rig Veda says in another place :
“I am a composer of hymns (i.e. a Brahmana), my father is a physician (a Vaishya or Sudra), my mother grinds corn on a stone (a sudra). We are all engaged in different occupations.” That shows that people could be from different varnas and occupations within the same family in vedic times.

B) Fa Hien, a Buddhist pilgrim from China, visited India around 400 AD. From his writings it is clear :

"Only the lot of the Chandals he found unenviable; outcastes by reason of their degrading work as disposers of dead, they were universally shunned... But no other section of the population were notably disadvantaged, no other caste distinctions attracted comment from the Chinese pilgrim, and no oppressive caste 'system' drew forth his surprised censure. In this period kings of Sudra and Brahmin origin were as common as those of Kshatriya varna and caste system was not wholly prohibitive and repressive."

C) The following verses/texts from Bhagwad Gita and Mahabharata don’t support caste system :

i) “The devotees of the Lord are not Shudras; Shudras are they who have no faith in the Lord whichever be their caste. A wise man should not slight even an outcaste if he is devoted to the Lord; he who looks down on him will fall into hell." - Mahabharata
ii) There is no superior caste. The Universe is the work of the Immense Being. The beings created by him were only divided into castes according to their aptitude." - Mahabharata, Shanti Parva
iii) Of Brahmanas, Kshtriyas and Vaishyas, as also the Sudras, O Arjuna, the duties are distributed according to the qualities born of their own nature." -Bhagavad Gita 18.41.

This verse makes it very clear that duty of a person must be in accordance with their natural qualities. So, this verse very clearly discards the "varna by birth" theory.

iv) A man does not become a Brahman by the mere fact of his birth, not even by the acquisition of Vedic scholarship; it is good character alone that can make one a Brahman. He will be worse than a Shudra if his conduct is not in conformity with the rules of good behavior.” ( from the famous dialogue between the Yaksha and Yudhishthir in Mahabharata)
v) "janmana jayate shudrah samskarairdvija uchyate" - All are born Shudras, it is only through certain rites or inner training that one becomes a Brahmin or twice-born. --- from Mahabharata

D) There are many Rishis who should have been branded as Shudras by the standards of Manu’s Laws but they were revered as the best of Rishis/brahmins by all within Hinduism :

i) Sage Vyasa : Who gave us the most of our revered scriptures within Hinduism. He was born to a sage Parashar (who could not be called a Brahmin by birth) and a fisherwoman(i.e sudra). By the laws of Manu, he should have be regarded as Nishada, a shudra but was regarded as Brahmana.

Some in this forum (as asserted by TTA and GaneshPrasad ji in their posts ) have tried to brand these Rishis as Brahmins as they were born to Brahmin fathers but please refer to this rule from manusmriti :

10.8. From a Brahmana, with the daughter of a Vaisya is born (a son) called an Ambashtha, with the daughter of a sudra a Nishada, who is also called Parasava.

ii) Sage Parashar : The famous sage and one of the greatest Hindu astrologers. He was born to Shakti Muni (Son of vashishtha) and a Chandala woman. So, Sage Parashar was also a Sudra by the Law of Manu 10.8 above.
iii) Sage Aitreya : He gave us the famous Aitreya Upanishad. He was born to a Sudra woman.
iv) Sage Vidura : He gave us the famous Vidur Neeti was considered a Brahmin but was actually born to a Sudra woman, as servant of the palace
v) Kuru and Pandu : They were born to Vedvyas so they should also have been called sudra or Brahmin but they were considered Kshatriya because of their Kshatriya dharma
vi) Risi Kavas Ilusu was revealed Suktas (X.30) (X.31) (X.32) and (X.33) of Rigveda and sloka 453 of Samveda. Risi Ilusu Aksova mojvan was revealed Sukta (X.34) of Rigveda. Both, under current Manusmriti definition were sudra.
vii) In Tandya Brahman (14.66) risi Vatsa has been called a sudra-putra. Revelations to risi Vatsa are there in Rigveda, (VIII.6) (VIII.11), Samveda (8,20,137,143, etc) and Yaj (IV.16-36), (VII.40), (XXVI.15).
viii) Risi Kaksivat was son of risi Dirghatamas by a sudra maid servant (Brihaddevata IV.24.25). Risi Kaksivat was revealed many richas in RV (I.119 to 125).
ix) Maharisi Valmiki who composed Valmiki Ramayan was a sudra by birth.
x) Chandragupta Maurya : He was considered a Kshatriya by Hindus though he was a Sudra (Muria tribe)
xi) Sakas, Kushans, Huns, yavanas, Pahalavas, Kambojas and Paradas were foreign invaders who should have been branded as outcastes (avarnas) but they were assimilated within Hindu society as Kshatriyas due to their being warriors and rulers.

E) The Manusmriti as we have today is a scripture written/modified from 200 BC to 100 AD, as claimed by many historians. So, it can't have authority over the Vedas which are much older.
F) Vajrashoochika Upanishad doesn’t accept the “Varna by birth” theory.

OM

grames
26 March 2010, 05:10 AM
In 9.32 and 9.33, Lord Sri Krishna specifically says women, vaishya, and shudra are of sinful birth. He uses the term “papa yoni”. Yoni is what? It refers to source, origin, decent, or female reproductive organ. How can this not be related to birth? All the three great acharyas, and one Ramakrishna Mutt publication give this interpretation only. I am just presenting what they are saying. If you think I am just seeing what I want to see and hear, then these great stalwarts are also doing the same thing.
Cheers!

Dear Prof.

This is very interesting and i haven't read a lot of your messages and happen to read this of yours today and shocked and surprised. First, i admire your interest in 'quoting' from some great Acharya's bashyas and glad you are not a total atheiest. :)

Second, i want to advice you to be more careful and present the great Acharyas translations with out adding anything more any less. I expect you to present their translations/bashyas if you have them with you as i am very well aware that the bashyas of Shri Ramanuja for BG 9.23 does not say what you conveyed here. (There is no direct bashya from Shri Madhva on this particular verse. Sri Prabupada's bashyas have two different wordings where one wordings is close to what you said and the original version of BG As it is has different wording which stands with Shri Ramanuja's bhasya which is actually the correct translation. Shri Sankara's bhasya on this also inline with Shri Ramanuja's). So, please provide their bhasyas in sanskrit first and then english and then let us see if they convey what you conveyed here claiming ur version as theirs. If you do not have one, take this message....

Though i do not intend to pose like a feminist to justify certain ideals of feminism, at least the bashyakaras did not do the injustice to woman, vaishya or Sudra with any of their personal inclination. Sri Ramanuja and Sri Madhva are known to be greatest reformers as well as theistic proponents with utmost respect for Truth. If you happen to believe the greatest Vaishnava Achariya's given bhasyas like this, then the birth and varna of Lord Krshna who happen to sing this BG, Himself is a papa Yoniya! That is like sickening thing even if u come up with million other justification for otherwise.

It is one another proof that Varna is not by birth or associated with birth and even the greatest Gate keepers of Vaikunta had to get birth as Demons and also the greatest bhakta, Prahaladha had to take birth in the family of demons. More than reading in to the truth, i am not sure why a rationalist like you also fall in to "wrong" selfish knowledge of certain people.

grames
26 March 2010, 05:55 AM
Dear ji,



Namaste

So, appearantly, in the 'olden days' , the caste of the body and caste of the soul fit together very well. But that was not the mandate given by shAstra ? As times changed, hanging on to this as a mandate is probably the error ?


The first statement itself is what i am saying as "wrong" understanding. Even in olden days or time immemorial, there is no "varna" by birth. The error is invented one and we are just getting carried away with justification because we are projected in to a life style where the environment is now so rigid and protected rather being open to breed the natural qualities of us. The open natured socio-economic model of Varnashrama is long gone and it is pointless to impose our current state of socio-economic structure as the varnashrama of SD.

In fact, all the great Greek philosophers agree to the concept of "Varna" as the inherent nature of individual being.



What i liked about Atanuji's post is, that he points out that its a hand-in-hand chicken-and-egg phenomenon.
No it is not totally like that. Only in the current socio-economic structure we are forced to believe, only a person who got birth in the family of rich or pious get such and such environment. In the varnashrama, this itself is an imposing socio-economic structure where the top and bottom class cannot/did not have access to any money or great resources. Everyone is protected both materially and spiritually and all the resources were open to all to utilize with respect to their yogyatha etc. Thats the very idea of Varnashrama and now teaching the opposite of it does not do any justice.



The Karma system is automatically the Dharma system.
Again not totally true :). Different philosophical schools have different stand on this but my opinion is, Dharma is much bigger than Karma System and it governs much more than mere actions and results. Its a big topic to discuss.

atanu
26 March 2010, 07:36 AM
For information:

The verse (9.32) according to achArya rAmAnuja's gIta bhAsyA is
translated as follows by Swami AdidevAnanda (of Ramakrishna Asrama):

"By taking refuge in Me even men of evil birth, women, VaisyAs and also
sUdrAs attain the supreme state"

However 'papa -- low' and 'punya' separately spoken in 9.32 and 9.33 proabably also reflect that different sets of karma were prescribed for people born in different castes. We will not understand the full significance but it is clear that bhakti over-rides all differences.

A body may be of a chandala or of a sudra and that will remain so during the full of bodily life -- but mind may be purified as per karma. The purified mind will be reflected appropriately in next birth.

Om namah Shivaya

atanu
26 March 2010, 08:40 AM
Dear ji
The first statement itself is what i am saying as "wrong" understanding. Even in olden days or time immemorial, there is no "varna" by birth.

namaste grames

Do you indicate that varna is fixed eternally and does not change during different incarnations (birth)?


No it is not totally like that. Only in the current socio-economic structure we are forced to believe, only a person who got birth in the family of rich or pious get such and such environment.

I think the opposition is indicative of defensive reaction to unjust western criticism. The very name of varna asrama dharma indicates work according to birth -- since there is no other perceptual expression of one's varNa. How will one know as to what one's shastric duties are? Do you know your varna?

Shri Krishna asks Arjuna to fight because Arjuna was a khatriya by birth. He also teaches us to perform prescribed karma. If birth was not an indicator of the overall guna-karma-varna, then there would be no indication for a common man. Shastric karma is divided as per jAti-varNa. Do you deny that? Kanchi Paramacharya and other eminent sages were not ignorant of shastra that they will teach wrongly.

However, everything can be forgotten by one who has surrendered ego, mind and body. Then there is no karma to be done. Else one has to do prescribed karma as per station of the body -- bacuse that only is the manifest indication. The connotation of exploitation and reaction thereof are both attributable to rajas of mind and not to the varNa, which is indicative of four eternal functions in the Universe. I must mention here that Pusan -- the Sun, the sustainer is Sudra.

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
26 March 2010, 11:21 AM
Hi folks, I don't have a lot more to add from Srimat BG. I am now going to move on to evidence for birth-based varna from Itihasa/Puranas. I am preparing a post on it and hopefully get it completed later today.

Atanu, I am not sure what you are getting at with differentiating between jiva and jivatman, I am using the two terms interchangeably, and I have seen others doing the same thing. In any case, I am not sure whether this point is germane here.

My aim in this thread is to show that the varna system as devised and practiced is supposed to be birth based. I am not getting into the discrimination part of varna at all here. If there is thread about that, I will contribute and show that the varna system cannot sustain itself for very long unless it is birth based and discriminatory.

Devotee, I am only presenting translations that I think are faithful to the text and commentary by acharyas. I have provided the original text as well. I am going to leave it at that and move on.

Thank you...

atanu
26 March 2010, 12:09 PM
Atanu, I am not sure what you are getting at with differentiating between jiva and jivatman, I am using the two terms interchangeably, and I have seen others doing the same thing. In any case, I am not sure whether this point is germane here.

My aim in this thread is to show that the varna system as devised and practiced is supposed to be birth based. I am not getting into the discrimination part of varna at all here. If there is thread about that, I will contribute and show that the varna system cannot sustain itself for very long unless it is birth based and discriminatory.

Thank you...

Namaste Shri Nara

Regarding jiva and jivAtman, I requested you to help me understand how if jiva-s are all same and equal the differences in us arise? I requested that you may pm me or explain in another thread. I think it is germane to this thread and will be helpful to understand some other things, since usage of words and their meanings vary considerably.

I agree that the varna system is practiced based on birth. But it is so because of practical reasons -- for deciding vocation and shastric duties. It has to be like this since there is no other indication of varNa of an individual. The fundamental thing, however, is origin of varna in 16 kalas of Purusha. The world will always have varNa, whether you like it or not. Not accepting that varNa is from God and is eternal in this kAla universe is cause of many strifes, revolutions, and counter revolutions. We can do without them.

Moreover, in the "How do we counter" thread you, I think, are upholding these differences as real. How can you throw those differences as artificial here? vaRNa is however, non-existent for a yogi who has withdrawn sixteen kalas of Purusha and sees sameness in a dog and in a brahmana. But the truth for a stitha pragnya yogi is just reverse of the truth of a common man.

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
26 March 2010, 02:28 PM
Regarding jiva and jivAtman, I requested you to help me understand how if jiva-s are all same and equal the differences in us arise?Are you asking for my personal opinion? If so, here it is, I don’t think there is anything like jivatma. The consciousness is a result brain activity. The differences we see are because of genes and natural variability. When we die, that is it, nothing more. Parts of our genes live on in our progeny. That is all there is to it. This is my considered opinion.

If you are asking for the position of VA, then in one word, karma. Karma is the root cause of all the differences. Briefly, there are three tatvas, chetana, acetana, Iswara. Cetanas are jeevas. All jeevas are equal in essence. The differences are due to karma. These differences manifest in different births. Therefore, karma directs a jeeva to be born into certain varna which is strictly determined by parentage. Sins of previous births result in female, and lower order varna births. Punya results in higher order varna and male births.

Cheers!

vivendi
26 March 2010, 02:47 PM
Dear Atanu,

Not according to the Kanchi pontiff. If you read the link I posted before he firmly argues against varna by qualities. He says varna is by BIRTH ONLY. Here is a quote from him:

"Some concede that Bhagavan does not deny caste differences, but however argue that, according to the Lord, caste is not based on birth but on the individual qualities of people. In support they quote this line from the Gita. "Caturvarnyam mayasrstam guna-karma-vibagasah".

All this shows that by svadharma it is jati dharma that the Lord means. Men like Dronacarya were born Brahmins but they took up the duty of Ksatriyas. Bhagavan does not deprecate them since they were otherwise great men, but all the same he does not show any displeasure when Bhima taunts Dronacarya for having forsaken the dharma of his birth. Thus we have confirmation that by svadharma the Lord means the jati dharma of birth."


So Nara is right on the Advaitin's record of maintaining a brahmin is a brahmin by birth only. He has not yet provided evidence to show Shri Ramanuja's POV. My contesting points to Nara are;

1. Ramanuja said that all souls are equal, contain satchitananda. When all souls are equal, how can he differentiate between a brahmin and a shudra? Yet Nara says his teachings were only for brahmins.

2. Ramanuja converted lower caste groups to brahmins. So how is this allegation that he followed varna by birth true?

I hope Nara will respond.

atanu
26 March 2010, 03:17 PM
Dear Atanu,

Not according to the Kanchi pontiff. If you read the link I posted before he firmly argues against varna by qualities. He says varna is by BIRTH ONLY. Here is a quote from him:

"Some concede that Bhagavan does not deny caste differences, but however argue that, according to the Lord, caste is not based on birth but on the individual qualities of people. In support they quote this line from the Gita. "Caturvarnyam mayasrstam guna-karma-vibagasah".

All this shows that by svadharma it is jati dharma that the Lord means. Men like Dronacarya were born Brahmins but they took up the duty of Ksatriyas. Bhagavan does not deprecate them since they were otherwise great men, but all the same he does not show any displeasure when Bhima taunts Dronacarya for having forsaken the dharma of his birth. Thus we have confirmation that by svadharma the Lord means the jati dharma of birth."



Namaste Vivendi

I agree and that is what I meant. Svadharma can only be jati dharma since there is no way for any common person to ascertain one's spiritual colours. Arjuna was asked to fight because he was born a khatriya. What I additionally said was that spiritual colours are from Purusha Himself - so exploitation based on jAti vAda will be wrong. I also said that stitha pragnya yogis see same everywhere. Hope I am clear.

I will also add that svadharma can only be jati dharma because the fruit of karma is decided by Ishwara and birth is also such a fruit.
-------------

Shri Nara appears to hold two briefs and that makes it a bit difficult. But I see above that he has stated the VA perspective in light of which your first question is answered more or less. But the second question he has to answer.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
26 March 2010, 03:35 PM
All jeevas are equal in essence.

Cheers!

Namaste Shri Nara

That is why I asked. Earlier this essence word was missing. earlier you said:


Other orthodox schools hold jivas to be all equal, free of gender or varna.

My main question now, in addition to vivendi's questions, is why you think that varNa is a blot, when it appears that Lord Himself instituted it?

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
26 March 2010, 03:37 PM
... My contesting points to Nara are;
1. Ramanuja said that all souls are equal, contain satchitananda. When all souls are equal, how can he differentiate between a brahmin and a shudra? Yet Nara says his teachings were only for brahmins.

2. Ramanuja converted lower caste groups to brahmins. So how is this allegation that he followed varna by birth true?


Dear vivendi, where are you getting all this from? There is absolutely no evidence that he converted "lower" caste people into Brahmins. It is true that he wanted all varna to be treated with respect and taught that everyone is eligible for moksha through prapatti irrespective of varna or gender. To say that he saw some as "lower" and needed to be converted is a misunderstanding of what he stood for. I recommend you read a biography of Bhagavat Ramanuja. He is the one who coined the term "thirukkulathor" which Gandhi translated into Harijan. If you know Tamil, I recommend 6000ppadi Guru Parampara Prabhavam. This book should be available near Thirvallikeni Temple. There is a good English book available at Ramakrishna Mutt.

To your first question, according to VA, varnashrama darma is only for human births. Jivas residing in animal bodies, in inanimate things like dadipanda's pot, in other lokas, and un-embodied jivas in transition are free of varnashrama. Differences are only in samsara in human bodies.

Thank you...

Nara
26 March 2010, 03:44 PM
... Shri Nara appears to hold two briefs and that makes it a bit difficult.

No atanu, I don't have two beliefs. Since I am somewhat familiar with VA I am presenting VA's position, from a purely academic POV, and I also happen to think, from a purely academic POV, VA is more consistent with Vedas. But I don't believe in an afterlife.

Thanks...

atanu
26 March 2010, 03:54 PM
No atanu, I don't have two beliefs. Since I am somewhat familiar with VA I am presenting VA's position. From a purely academic POV, I think VA is more consistent with Vedas. But I don't believe in an afterlife.

Thanks...

Namaste Namaste

Let us see now. You do not believe in an afterlife. But you believe that VA is more consistent though VA (and D) teach eternal existence of individuals?

When you were defending VA, I was actually going to ask you how can you prove that you existed and will exist beyond this bodily life? And this in the light of VA upholding that pratayksha is stronger than sruti? How then VA has any proof of eternal existence of a personality/individual? There is no pratyaksha proof of an afterlife except sruti and smriti.

Main Q vanishes if you hold the postion of 'No afterlife'. Then this full discussion is null and void, because this discussion is based on Gita, which holds the afterlife to be a fact.

That is why I said that it is difficult when i do not know wherefrom you are coming. I hope I have made my points clear.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
26 March 2010, 04:09 PM
....... And this in the light of VA upholding that pratayksha is stronger than sruti?

:) :)

atanu, I think you are making this very difficult for yourself.

The title of this thread is, "Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding". So, the question is, what does BG say about Varna. To discuss this, I don't need to believe in anything. All I have to do is to present evidence from BG and BG commentaries that are acceptable my opponents.

BTW, VA does not hold prathayaksha or anumana to be stronger than Shruti. Swami Vendatha Desikan says that he can take any position and successfully defend it by logic alone. But he says Shruti is supreme and therefore, he says he will let shruti alone to guide him in any interpretation he gives. This again is just what they say. I am just presenting their view.

Thank you...

Nara
26 March 2010, 07:25 PM
Hello folks, Greetings!

In this post I wish to present my arguments regarding birth and varna by citing a few references from Ithihasa puranas. Please note that I am only presenting the position espoused in these texts. My own position on varna is already well known, I favor a society free of varna.

Mahabharatha
Of all the characters in Mahabharata, Vidura is the one who is most wise, brave, honest, and all things righteous. If guna alone is the basis of varna, then there would be no greater brahamana than Vidura. There would be no greater Kshatriya than Vidura. Yet, Mahabharata says he was a Shudra because he was born to a servant maid. His father being Vyasa did not matter. While father is the one who is supposed to determine one’s varna, in Vidura’s case it was his mother’s varna that made him a shudra. Please note, the point here is not whether Mahabharata respected Vidua, it certainly did, but it also presented him only as a Shudra based strictly on birth.

Same is the case with Gadotgaja, the fierce warrior son of Bhima. Why is he a raksasha like his mother, and not a kshatriya like his father? If guna and action by themselves determine varna without regard to birth, he should indeed be a kshatriya. Perhaps the argument is he was not even a human as he was a rakshasa, but if Bhima can bed with a rakshasa his son can be a kshatriya, can he not?

In Vana Parva, Sage Markandeya narrates the greatness of Brahmanas and Kshtriyas, but nothing on Vaishyas and Shudras. (Aside: If the varna system is nothing but division of labor for the benefit of everyone, why is there no praise of the other two varnas?) Markandeya also narrates the story of a brahmana called Kausikan. The story starts out with him behaving with anger and ego towards a bird and then a virtuous housewife. If guna alone was the basis for Varna, he wouldn’t be a Brahmin at all. Later, he ends up with a butcher called Dharmavyaada. This butcher shows all the qualities of a Brahmin, yet not a Brahmin because he was not born one. Seeing how wise Dharmavyada was, Kausikan implores him to give up his lowly occupation of a butcher. For this, Dharmavyada explains that following Varnashrama darma is paramount. His birth in this varna was due to the sins he committed in his previous birth. He further explains that the only way to be released from his sins is to faithfully follow the varna dharma ordained for his current birth. This exchange shows sins in one life will result in a birth in a low varna and whatever exalted gunas he may have, he still have to practice the varna dharma.

Dronocharya exhibited all the qualities of a kshatriya and acted like one. The same with Kripacharya who fought for Duryodana like a kshatriya warrior. Yet, they both are Brahmins because of their birth. Parasurama is another Brahmin only because his dad jamadagnya was a Brahmin. If guna and action are the basis he should be a Kshatriya. He went around meting out collective punishment on all kashthriyas for the crime of one.

Dronacharya refused to teach Karna because he was not a kshatriya. Drona came to this conclusion because Karna was known as a son of a charioteer and therefore not a Kshatriya. Karna later became one of the greatest warriors. Yet he was constantly hounded by Bhishma as Sootaputra. If it was only gunas that determine varna, neither Bhishma, nor Drona should have had any problem accepting Karna as a kshatriya. Karna, for siding with Duryodana, deserved everything he got, but that is besides the point we are discussing here.

The pathetic story of Ekalaiva is another telling example of varna determined by the parentage. Even though he was supposed to be one among the greatest archers, even greater than Arjuna himself, he was broken down because of he was not born a kshatriya.


Ramayana
The story of Shambuka in Ramayana also shows guna may not even play a part in varna, even though the lord himself says it is based on guna. When a brahmin’s child died it was immediately assumed the culprit was a violation of varnashrama. If guna alone makes one a Brahmin, then he is supposed to possess honesty, generosity, austerity, pity, compassion, patience, etc. This Brahmin who lost his son showed none of these characteristics and he and other Brahmins demanded the head of Shambuka. Whereas, when Rama confronted Shambuka, he was honest and forthright. He honestly said he was born into Shudra Varna. If guna is the criterion, then Shambuka probably qualifies to be a brahmana than the brahaamanas who called for his head.

Srimat Bhagavatham

I quote verse 7.11.13:
सम्स्कारा यदविच्छिन्नाः स द्विजो अजो जगाद यम् ।
इज्याध्ययनदानानि विहितानि द्विजन्मानाम् ।
जन्म कर्म अवदातानां क्रियाश्च आश्रमचोदिताः ॥

Rough translation: Twice born are the ones who have undergone all the Vedic samskaras without disruption. The duties prescribed for the dwajas include pooja, studying Vedas, charity. These dwajas are pure by birth and karma, and they should follow the principles of the (four)stages of life (Ashramas). (I am giving my translation only as a courtesy. Please rely only on the original for your own understanding).
Having thus included birth as a criterion for varna, the chapter proceeds to describe the duties of the four varnas. The duty of Shudra varna is to make his living from serving the twice-born.

Vishnupurana
Vishnu purana says in chapter 3.10, upon the tenth day after the birth of a child the father is to give a name. It goes on to say how the name should end for the four varnas. For a Brahmin the name should end with Sharman. For a kshatriya the suffix must be Varman. Gupta and dasa are for Vaisyas and Súdras.

Like me, Parashara must think that Varna is based on birth, for, if it is to be based on gunas, how are we to ascertain varna of the baby on the 10th day of since birth?

Cheers!

vivendi
26 March 2010, 08:40 PM
Dear vivendi, where are you getting all this from? There is absolutely no evidence that he converted "lower" caste people into Brahmins.
okay lets disregard my second question. I heard that form a devotee and he may have said it to show his affection to the guru. I am interested to know about my first which is:

1. Ramanuja said that all souls are equal, contain satchitananda. When all souls are equal, how can he differentiate between a brahmin and a shudra? Yet Nara says his teachings were only for brahmins.

Your answer to this one was:


To your first question, according to VA, varnashrama darma is only for human births. Jivas residing in animal bodies, in inanimate things like dadipanda's pot, in other lokas, and un-embodied jivas in transition are free of varnashrama. The question still stands that is "if he said all souls are equal...then why do you say his interpretations are discriminative towards shudras and women and others except brahmins?" I thought it was common knowledge that everyone were talking about jivas residing in human bodies.

Now that you unintentionally or intentionally brought up that varna dharma is not valid for animals, I was wondering from where (reference, and the author from where you got it from please if you dont mind) did you get it from?


Differences are only in samsara in human bodies. So an animals soul is not equal to a human soul according to Shri Ramanuja?

devotee
26 March 2010, 09:27 PM
Dear Nara,

I am interested to learn one thing :

Can you quote from Mahabharata which shows that Vidura was considered a Shudra and was treated as Shudra ?

How can Vyas be called a Brahmana as per Manusmriti 10.8 ?

OM

Nara
26 March 2010, 09:32 PM
.... So an animals soul is not equal to a human soul according to Shri Ramanuja?


No, not at all, all jivas, according to VA, are alike, equal in their essence. Based on their karma, VA says, differing births result. An animal is obviously different from a chair or a table or a human being. The differences are only in the body that result due to karma. But what is not different is the soul, they all are of the same kind and are alike, so the VAs say.

Let me recommend the 6th chapter titled Tatvatriya Cintana Adhikaram, of the most important text of Swami Sri Desikan wrote for Sri Vaishnavas, namely, Srimat Rahasya Thriya Saram.

If you are interested I can present an essence of this chapter when time permits, but I rather you study these texts if you want to gain a true understanding of VA.

Cheers!

atanu
26 March 2010, 11:34 PM
:) :)

atanu, I think you are making this very difficult for yourself.

The title of this thread is, "Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding". So, the question is, what does BG say about Varna. To discuss this, I don't need to believe in anything. All I have to do is to present evidence from BG and BG commentaries that are acceptable my opponents.

namaste

That is your view and i do not have to agree. BG speaks about varNa not in isolation for a single life but in respect of an eternal life.

But for this thread, if you limit yourself and do not surmise anything extra such as "vArNa is a blot", then only i can go with it. So, kindly restrict yourself and do not make social statements. (I do not have any doubt that varNa and jAti cannot be separated, except theoretically, but I object to your sweep that "vArNa is a blot" ).


BTW, VA does not hold prathayaksha or anumana to be stronger than Shruti. Swami Vendatha Desikan says that he can take any position and successfully defend it by logic alone. But he says Shruti is supreme and therefore, he says he will let shruti alone to guide him in any interpretation he gives. This again is just what they say. I am just presenting their view.

Sri Ramanuja, in his introduction to Brahma Sutra holds Advaita wrong and states: In cases of Scripture conflicting with Perception, Scripture is not stronger.

It is irony that Sri Ramanuja cannot ever prove by pratayksha, continuity of his own self? He does not stand a chance against Buddhists and also contradicts himself with his theory. This is my considered understanding and you do not have to acknowledge the fallacy, since it is not the subject here. I note it in passing.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
26 March 2010, 11:59 PM
Hello folks, Greetings!
Ramayana
The story of Shambuka in Ramayana also shows guna may not even play a part in varna, even though the lord himself says it is based on guna. When a brahmin’s child died it was immediately assumed the culprit was a violation of varnashrama. If guna alone makes one a Brahmin, then he is supposed to possess honesty, generosity, austerity, pity, compassion, patience, etc. This Brahmin who lost his son showed none of these characteristics and he and other Brahmins demanded the head of Shambuka. Whereas, when Rama confronted Shambuka, he was honest and forthright. He honestly said he was born into Shudra Varna. If guna is the criterion, then Shambuka probably qualifies to be a brahmana than the brahaamanas who called for his head.

Namaste Shri Nara

Actually you are presenting excellent facts and logic here, for me at least. The JivAtman (which you call essence of jiva) , is ever pure and taintless (actually advaita holds the jivAtman to be same as paramAtman). The koshas are representive of guna-karma and that is overall reflected in birth and body. Ultimately Brahman has no body and no birth.

But regarding Sambhuka you are over-reaching by concluding that guna may not have anything with varNa. You are contradicting yourself. Again it proves that the karma alone is not signifier but the accompanying knowledge and the intention are. One may do austerity and give alms with ulterior motives. There is no way to asceratain the real intent except through pratayaksha proof of a birth in pious family. And Vedas, shastras, Gita do teach that Lord ensures pious birth for the faithful. So, we must take status of birth as an evidence. varNa is not the result of action of present time alone, but it is the accumulation of guna-karma of past actions. So, the mention of Twice Born is made.

I note that the story of Sambhuka is used by political dalits who may not have pure knowledge and pure intent but act out of grudge to gain material positional advantage.


Like me, Parashara must think that Varna is based on birth, for, if it is to be based on gunas, how are we to ascertain varna of the baby on the 10th day of since birth?


Vivendi has already established this from citation of Kanchi Seer.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
27 March 2010, 12:23 AM
For all readers as a note

Good karma does not lead to accumulation of guna-varna in the conventional sense of accumulation of wealth. Actually the rajasic-tamasic gunas dwindle. And the veil that is varNa becomes more and more transparent, finally letting the Atman shine as it is.

Om Namah Shivaya

kd gupta
27 March 2010, 04:44 AM
For all readers as a note

Good karma does not lead to accumulation of guna-varna in the conventional sense of accumulation of wealth. Actually the rajasic-tamasic gunas dwindle. And the veil that is varNa becomes more and more transparent, finally letting the Atman shine as it is.

Om Namah Shivaya
Yes , Atanuji
As per gita the mind is the main source to attain the next body which may be in any Varna in Shrimatam gehe , this is also in confirmation of Vedmantra Yadjyotiramratam .
Valmiki ramayan contains the detailing of all five Varnas including Nishad or Nishidda [ detail available in padma puran ] as said in Vedas . Ravna was Brahmin by varna but a nishidda , similarly gita clarifies the varna as per activity and not by birth , meaning exactly the same as you said that good deeds precipitate in Shudra varna also .
This is only in India that a worker is not treated as per his duties but as per his caste and is the main root of confrontation between higher varna Ravnas and so called Brahmins and Kshatriyas [ not Baniyas of course ] and the poor but gentle low varna people .Actually money is tending to play main role and not the varna system so any scripture may be gita or ramayan has very negligible purpose for the morally corrupt people .

devotee
27 March 2010, 05:05 AM
Namaste,

Many scholars believe that story of Shambuka was added later on into the Ramayana & it couldn't have been the real story written by Maharishi Valmiki. The reasons are :

a) The conduct of Rama before this has been very compassionate to all beings. If he differentiated people on the basis of Caste, he would not have visited Matanga Rishi and Shabari who were Shudras or outcastes by Manusmriti standards. How could he eat half-eaten (joothe ber) berries from hands of Shabari ? Shabnari and Matanga both were saints. Why didn't Rama kill them ?
b) How could Valmiki, being a Shudra, acquire rights to write one of the greatest epics Hindus have ?
c) Ravana was a Brahmin by caste. Why was he not forgiven for his sins or let off with a minor penalty ? Does Manusmriti prescribe death penalty to a Brahmin in such conditions ?

OM

Nara
27 March 2010, 07:22 AM
....Sri Ramanuja, in his introduction to Brahma Sutra holds Advaita wrong and states: In cases of Scripture conflicting with Perception, Scripture is not stronger.

atanu, I request you to please provide the original text.



I note that the story of Sambhuka is used by political dalits who may not have pure knowledge and pure intent but act out of grudge to gain material positional advantage.Well, well, I won't object to this political/social statement, I welcome it. I request you also not to request me to self censure.

Kindly note that the comment you are objecting to was made in defense of a charge against me. I did not see anyone objecting to that charge. atanu, IMO, these meta arguments are just a waste of time.

Cheers!

Nara
27 March 2010, 11:28 AM
.... Can you quote from Mahabharata which shows that Vidura was considered a Shudra and was treated as Shudra ?

I did not say he was treated as a shudra, he was held in very high esteem. Lord Sri Krishna stayed with him because he was the only decent man in Hastinapuri at that time.

But he still was considered a Shudra because of his birth. Here is something from Vidura himself from one his many conversations with Dhritarashtra.

"Vidura said (http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05041.htm), 'I am born in the Sudra order and, therefore, do not venture to say more than what I have already said. The understanding, however, of that Rishi leading a life of celibacy, is regarded by me to be infinite. He that is a Brahmana by birth, by discoursing on even the profoundest mysteries, never incureth the censure of the gods. It is for this alone that I do not discourse to thee, upon the subject.'
My opinion is, Vyasa is considered a Brahmana. I don't have the time to dig for textual evidence. I did not cite him as a Brahmana in spite of low caste mother because of that.



Many scholars believe that story of Shambuka was added later on into the Ramayana & it couldn't have been the real story written by Maharishi Valmiki. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambuka): Many scholars believe that this story was made up to eliminate any threats to the upper-castes.

It is quite likely that Shambuka's story is a later insertion. But that just opens up another can of worms. In the present context of examining evidence from Hindu scriptures, we have to rely on what is generally accepted.

Cheers!

atanu
27 March 2010, 01:18 PM
atanu, I request you to please provide the original text.


namaste Nara

It is in the Introduction of Brahma Sutra bhasya of Sri Ramanuja (translation by George Thibaut).


Well, well, I won't object to this political/social statement, I welcome it. I request you also not to request me to self censure.

Kindly note that the comment you are objecting to was made in defense of a charge against me. I did not see anyone objecting to that charge. atanu, IMO, these meta arguments are just a waste of time.

I still will request you since it began with the out of context statement "varNa is a blot".

I do not see it as any charge. I do not know whether the story is an insertion or not. There is no way to prove in any way. I was just analysing the story and noted a fact that the story is cited often by political dalits. I am not denying that there is a political undercurrent in India based on interpretations of caste. But it is my understanding that political agenda can be built on any issue. If not caste, then some other issue will be found. But that is not under discussion here, I hope. That can be discussed under other threads, if it has to be.

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
27 March 2010, 02:31 PM
...
It is in the Introduction of Brahma Sutra bhasya of Sri Ramanuja (translation by George Thibaut).

Sri Vasihnavas pride themselves to be "parama vaideekas" and accuse Advaitees as prachanna bouddas. So I am very surpirsed with this translation you are providing. I need the exact original text, if you don't mind. At least provide the chapter and verse number so I can check it out.

Please note that I have always provided to the extent possible original texts. It takes a lot of time.


..I still will request you since it began with the out of context statement "varNa is a blot".You still don't get it do you? Go back and read the post where I say varna is a blot on Hinduism, it was in response to a charge made agaist me. That was the context. Even otherwise, this is a thread where we are talking about Varna and why do you think my comment about varna is out of context, and you bring "political Dalits" out of nowhere and that is just fine???!!!!

What a strange world we live in.

I think I am well within the context of this thread to say that varna system is blot on Hinduism and I can prove it, and I will, after I am done with this thread.

I am tired of this meta arguments, I am going to drop this and pursue the main topic under this thread.


peace...

vivendi
27 March 2010, 02:54 PM
No, not at all, all jivas, according to VA, are alike, equal in their essence.
I suppose you meant jivas to be souls and not bodies? If that is the case then according to Shri Ramanuja, they are all equal, whether they are animals or human beings.


Based on their karma, VA says, differing births result. Based on whose karma? souls!? If all souls are equal then how does the karma differ from one to another?


An animal is obviously different from a chair or a table or a human being. The differences are only in the body that result due to karma. But what is not different is the soul, they all are of the same kind and are alike, so the VAs say. jiva is the technical word for soul, not human body. Still my question was "if all souls are equal, how are varnas not equal?" If your answer is that varna is for the body and not the soul, then a follow up is

Body is made up of matter. Are you saying matter has varna? If you leave the soul out of the equation, then it doesn't matter whether the body is that of a human or a dinosaur, because the body is made up of matter. How is varna associated with matter? Are you associating karma with matter or a soul?


Let me recommend the 6th chapter titled Tatvatriya Cintana Adhikaram, of the most important text of Swami Sri Desikan wrote for Sri Vaishnavas, namely, Srimat Rahasya Thriya Saram.

If you are interested I can present an essence of this chapter when time permits, but I rather you study these texts if you want to gain a true understanding of VA.
Thanks for the reference. Please present this chapter.

vivendi
27 March 2010, 02:56 PM
No atanu, I don't have two beliefs. Since I am somewhat familiar with VA I am presenting VA's position, from a purely academic POV, and I also happen to think, from a purely academic POV, VA is more consistent with Vedas. But I don't believe in an afterlife.

Thanks...

From what you have written so far Naraji, it looks like you are presenting Achintyabhedabheda, not VA ;)

atanu
27 March 2010, 03:16 PM
Sri Vasihnavas pride themselves to be "parama vaideekas" and accuse Advaitees as prachanna bouddas. So I am very surpirsed with this translation you are providing. I need the exact original text, if you don't mind. At least provide the chapter and verse number so I can check it out.

Please note that I have always provided to the extent possible original texts. It takes a lot of time.

Namaste Nara

I think pride is the correct word. Thank you for confirming. I am providing the link from Sacred texts.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/index.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48025.htm

Some strange logic there.


You still don't get it do you? Go back and read the post where I say varna is a blot on Hinduism, it was in response to a charge made agaist me. ------What a strange world we live in.

I think I am well within the context of this thread to say that varna system is blot on Hinduism and I can prove it, and I will, after I am done with this thread.

I am tired of this meta arguments, I am going to drop this and pursue the main topic under this thread.
peace...

;) You are not out of context and you are out to prove that varNa is a blot. Yet you are tired and going to drop this??

Strange. Let us see.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
27 March 2010, 03:37 PM
Based on whose karma? souls!? If all souls are equal then how does the karma differ from one to another?



I am also interested to know this.

Nara
27 March 2010, 05:20 PM
.. I am providing the link from Sacred texts.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/index.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48025.htm



Here is what I asked atanu:
"I need the exact original text, if you don't mind. At least provide the chapter and verse number so I can check it out."
If you don't want to provide it please say so, don't give me the run around.


peace...

Nara
27 March 2010, 05:53 PM
... Based on whose karma? souls!? If all souls are equal then how does the karma differ from one to another?

vivendi, I feel no need to defend VA. But just as courtesy I will provide some answers. If you want to debate VA's view on varna I request you to find someone who is interested in such a task.

For VA, jivas are all equal in their basic properties, which I already explained in an earlier post. Equal does not mean without any difference altogether. If I can give you an example, all the children are equal to a parent, but they are different as well.

From what the VAs call beginingless time, jeevas have been accumulating karma. In accordance with the part of the karma that starts to give effect, jeevas take various births. These births, if human, will have varna associated. Then, the jeeva is required to follow the duties of the varna of that birth. In as much the doer is the jeeva, the varna duties are for the jeeva, in that particular body.

VA POV is, the varna stays with the jiva only as long as they are in a particular human body. When the jeeva leaves the human body, the varna of that particular birth is over. If there is a next birth and if it is a human birth, which would result in accordance with the karma, then, the birth varna will be a function of that portion of the karma that is acting at that time.

In as much as the accumulated karma differs from jeeva to jeeva, their births and consequent duties also differ.

If you have any question with understanding any of this I will answer. If you wish to debate this please find someone else for the reasons I have already stated.

If you think I am presenting, Achintyabhedabheda, not VA, I challenge you to prove it with proper evidence. If you are unable to do so, I request you to stop telling me what I am.

Cheers!

atanu
27 March 2010, 06:02 PM
Here is what I asked atanu:
"I need the exact original text, if you don't mind. At least provide the chapter and verse number so I can check it out."
If you don't want to provide it please say so, don't give me the run around.

peace...

Dear Shri Nara

Is your ire showing? If I had the original sanskrit work, i would have shown it. Why do you assume that i am giving you the run down? On the other hand, if you think Thibaut is wrong, it is for you to say so and prove. It is your subject. I expect you to give us the original sanskrit.

See, I do not need to show flaws in VA. Shri Madhavacharya has done it. Advaitin has to only explain Madhavacharya's objections wrt advaita.

Regards

Om namah Shivaya

atanu
27 March 2010, 06:04 PM
For VA, jivas are all equal in their basic properties, which I already explained in an earlier post. Equal does not mean without any difference altogether. If I can give you an example, all the children are equal to a parent, but they are different as well.

Cheers!

:headscratch:

Cheers !

Impelled by whom these jeeva-s, which are equal to their parents but are different as well, have acquired bad karma and why?

vivendi
27 March 2010, 06:37 PM
vivendi, I feel no need to defend VA. But just as courtesy I will provide some answers. If you want to debate VA's view on varna I request you to find someone who is interested in such a task.
You don't need to defend VA and my expectations are not as such from you. Since you keep saying VA says this and VA says that, I think it is but proper to question you of the motive of those VA sayings. You just need to defend yourself. thats all.


For VA, jivas are all equal in their basic properties, which I already explained in an earlier post. Equal does not mean without any difference altogether. If I can give you an example, all the children are equal to a parent, but they are different as well.You are changing your views quite often from one post to another. First you say all souls are equal, then only the bodies are unequal. Now you are saying there is a difference. I am asking you some questions as to how you consider varna is by birth based on your own posts.

In order to clear the jugglery, please clarify per VA is soul of a child is different from the soul of a father?


From what the VAs call beginingless time, jeevas have been accumulating karma. In accordance with the part of the karma that starts to give effect, jeevas take various births. These births, if human, will have varna associated. If human? If varna is for the body, how do animals escape this system? Don't they have a body? How is their body makeup different from a human that only humans have varnas? If varna is for the body, which is nothing but made up of 5 substances, how do you associate the varna by birth to these material things?


Then, the jeeva is required to follow the duties of the varna of that birth. In as much the doer is the jeeva, the varna duties are for the jeeva, in that particular body.You made the same mistake earlier where you said varna is for the jiva. Shri Ramanuja said all jivas are equal and are made up of satchitananda quite equal to the bliss of bhagavan. Jiva is the technical term for a soul. Quite strange sometimes people who read bhagavatam, mahabharata, upanishads do not get this basic error.

vivendi
27 March 2010, 06:46 PM
VA POV is, the varna stays with the jiva only as long as they are in a particular human body. When the jeeva leaves the human body, the varna of that particular birth is over. If there is a next birth and if it is a human birth, which would result in accordance with the karma, then, the birth varna will be a function of that portion of the karma that is acting at that time.Okay lets put it in a logical way the things you said so far;
Varna is not for the soul according to VA as you have understood it.
Varna is for the human body, not human soul
Varna is not for an animals body and animals soul both.

The questions are;
How does varna carry over to the next birth when it is the soul that is migrating? We know soul does not carry varna properties, right? So what carries varna properties?

Since varna is only for humans, does that mean a soul inside a human will not go into an animal body? Will that human be reborn only as a human? will that shudra be only be reborn as a shudra also in the next birth?

Since varna is for the body, what happens to the varna at death?


If you have any question with understanding any of this I will answer. If you wish to debate this please find someone else for the reasons I have already stated.I am only asking questions based on what you have posted of VA Naraji. In case you do not know the answers, I will understand and find someone else who knows VA.


If you think I am presenting, Achintyabhedabheda, not VA, I challenge you to prove it with proper evidence. If you are unable to do so, I request you to stop telling me what I am.
I don't know why I get this feelings sometimes that I know you. My hallucinations perhaps from a previous life. Maybe its just that there is a close relation between VA and Iskcons siddhantam and perhaps I am mistaken one for another. Apologies.

I get that "feeling" when you say you take arguments from VA siddhantam and I fail to see a coherant version. I will give the benefit of doubt to myself the next time when you put statements from VA for debunking varna system, and upon questioning them you say you are not here to defend VA.

Nara
27 March 2010, 09:18 PM
.. I get that "feeling" when you say you take arguments from VA siddhantam and I fail to see a coherant version..


Vivendi, I have nothing further to say that can make VA coherent to you. Please research on your own.

peace

vivendi
27 March 2010, 09:31 PM
Vivendi, I have nothing further to say that can make VA coherent to you. Please research on your own.

peace
Naraji I understand. I will keep asking relevant questions. Its upto you to answer or not. Clinging onto VA to refute Advaita will not work unless one has a good understanding of the same.

Nara
27 March 2010, 09:46 PM
.... Is your ire showing? If I had the original sanskrit work, i would have shown it.


Dear atanu, my ire is for me to control and channel, if it shows I apologize.

I have taken the trouble of quoting the original text wherever possible. You have cited a section title given by a translator as proof positive and now you are saying it is up to me to provide the original text, what a strange way to debate.

I have no bone in this fight, as far as I am concerned, A, or VA, or D take your own pick, does not matter to me, only that if you proclaim an allegiance to something, at least be consistent to your own proclaimed faith. And, if you want to criticize other schools, no problem go for it, but you need to be able to provide proper sources.

I once again ask you to provide (i) the exact Sanskrit text or the chapter and verse reference, not some title a translator has provided, or (ii) accept you made a mistake. I have a feeling this is too much to ask.

peace

saidevo
27 March 2010, 10:56 PM
It might be surprising to many of us (it was to me when I read it first time) that Gandhiji, who in spite/because of his reverence for Bhagavad GItA, held that varNa is only by birth and that the son should take up only his father's profession which is only noble and feel proud about it.

Here is a quote from Gandhiji from the book Philosophical reflections: essays on socio-ethical philosophy and philosophy by Ved Prakash Varma:

http://books.google.com/books?id=CwMGKto1Gg8C&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=%22varna+by+birth%22&source=bl&ots=DbnnmGc0VQ&sig=_mTSe9e5LGVAIOeHebswjQQGDeU&hl=en&ei=SMSuS53cDcu9rAem2fimAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22varna%20by%20birth%22&f=false

"The meaning of VarNa is incredibly simple. It simply means the following on the part of us all of the hereditary and traditional calling of our fathers, insofar as the traditional calling is not inconsistent with fundamental ethics, and this is only for the purpose of earning one's livelihood. ... VarNa means pre-determination of the choice of man's profession. ... VarNa, therefore, is in a way the law of heredity. ... It is not a human invention but an immutable law of nature--the state or a tendency that is ever present and at work like Newton's law of gravitation. ... A Shudra has as much right to knowledge as a Brahman, but he falls from his state, if he tries to gain his livelihood through teaching. ... The only profession after his heart should be the profession of his fathers. There is nothing wrong in choosing that profession; on the contrary, it is noble. ... As I have interpreted VarNa-Dharma, there is no bar in any shape or form to the highest mental development. The bar, although normal, is against change of hereditary occupation for the sake of bettering one's material condition, and thus setting up a system of unhealthy and ruinous competition which is today robbing life of all its joy and beauty. ... The law of VarNa is nothing but the law of conservation of energy. Why should my son not be a scavenger if I am one? ... What I mean is that one born a scavenger must earn his livelihood by being a scavenger, and then do whatever else he likes. ... I believe that some people are born to teach and some to defend and some to engage in trade and agriculture and some to do manual labour, so much so that these occupations become hereditary."

Gandhiji gives a clear reason for his strong belief that VarNa is determined only by birth:

"If all of us follow this law of VarNa, we would limit our material ambition and our energy would be set free for exploring those vast fields whereby and where through we can know God. ... When I follow my father's profession, I need not even go to school to learn it, and my mental energy is set free for spiritual pursuits, because my money or rather livelihood is ensured. VarNa is the best form of religious pursuit. ... Whilst I have said that all men and women are born equal, I do not wish, therefore, to suggest that qualities are not inhereited; but, on the contrary, I believe that just as everyone inherits a particular form, so does he inherit the particular characteristics and qualities of his progenitors, and to make this admission is to conserve one's energy. ... VarNa, thus conceived, no man-made institution but the law of life universally governing the human family. Fulfilment of the law would make life livable, would spread peace and content, end all clashes and conflicts, put an end to starvation and pauperization, solve the problem of population, and even end disease and suffering."

**********

I very well remember the irony of it: in a thread on Gandhiji's politics, I was strongly against him with regard to his political policies in winning us the freedom, and yet, in this thread, I quote Gandhiji, because I have the same belief in VarNa by birth and propagation of jAti only by endogamy. I wonder what Devotee (who strongly supported Gandhiji's political policies in that thread) thinks of Gandhiji's belief quoted above.

devotee
28 March 2010, 12:19 AM
Namaste Saidevo ji,



I very well remember the irony of it: in a thread on Gandhiji's politics, I was strongly against him with regard to his political policies in winning us the freedom, and yet, in this thread, I quote Gandhiji, because I have the same belief in VarNa by birth and propagation of jAti only by endogamy. I wonder what Devotee (who strongly supported Gandhiji's political policies in that thread) thinks of Gandhiji's belief quoted above.

We both are in similar situation, though a bit differently. You criticised Gandhi's political policies and now are taking support of his views on Varna theory. On the other hand, I supported his political policies and now, am against his views (which was unknown to me till you told us all).

I think the situation is much more serious for me than it appears. That way I am against the views of my revered god-like Acharaya Sri Shankara too ( I need to go into in-depth study what he actually felt on this issue as not very clear picture emerges from one or two out-of-context quotes). On this forum, my views are against the views of Atanu and you .... who have been my very good spiritual friends on Advaita Vedanta ... and sadly, I almost fought with my dear friend Ganeshprasad ji on this issue. :(

In the light of the above facts, I think I should change my status vis-a-vis yours ---- Dear Saidevo ji, my situation is too bad as compared to yours. Please pray for me. :)

OM

saidevo
28 March 2010, 01:37 AM
namaste Devotee.



We both are in similar situation, though a bit differently. You criticised Gandhi's political policies and now are taking support of his views on Varna theory. On the other hand, I supported his political policies and now, am against his views (which was unknown to me till you told us all).


This only shows that we respect great people although we differ in opinions about some of their views, and this is certainly a good trait in us.



In the light of the above facts, I think I should change my status vis-a-vis yours ---- Dear Saidevo ji, my situation is too bad as compared to yours. Please pray for me. :)


You and I, Devotee, as most others are here in HDF, are humble in our most forthright views, and well-meaning where we need to bring up something personal; therefore, there is no possibility of loss of amity, although we might cause some frowns at times. I think that in this trait of bearing the brickbats, Prof.Nara excels us all--may God/Science bless/enlighten him!

atanu
28 March 2010, 02:00 AM
Dear atanu, my ire is for me to control and channel, if it shows I apologize.

I have taken the trouble of quoting the original text wherever possible. You have cited a section title given by a translator as proof positive and now you are saying it is up to me to provide the original text, what a strange way to debate.

I have no bone in this fight, as far as I am concerned, A, or VA, or D take your own pick, does not matter to me, only that if you proclaim an allegiance to something, at least be consistent to your own proclaimed faith. And, if you want to criticize other schools, no problem go for it, but you need to be able to provide proper sources.

I once again ask you to provide (i) the exact Sanskrit text or the chapter and verse reference, not some title a translator has provided, or (ii) accept you made a mistake. I have a feeling this is too much to ask.
peace

Namaste Shri Nara

I have already said that I do not have the original sanskrit Sribhashya and even if I had it, i would not go by your translation alone. The world knows George Thibaut's translation. If you think that Thibault's translation is wrong, you and your pals should declare so. I am surely not above mistake and if you think that I made a mistake then so be it. How does that matter to you and to me? If you feel good i also feel good.

I will tell you why I am discussing this. You said that those who should have objected to your saying that varNa is a blot, did not do so. Actually IMO, no one got the drift of where you were taking us.

When you first prove that varNa is equal to jAti and then proceed to prove that varNa is a blot -- it can mean only one thing. It means that what has been taught in Purusha Sukta and what has been taught in Gita that Bhagwan Himself is the author of varNa -- is a blot. In short, Hindu scripture is blot. Those who do not comprehend your logic do not object.

This is where I am pitching in from the beginning. When Bhagawan says "I am the creator/authour/source of varNa, it means the varNa differences are not Primary and Bhagwan is primary. It also means that varNa will naturally be reflected in jAti and naturally there will be friction. Yet the Primary is the one thread running through all these. Scripture everywhere teaches natural wisdom of remembrance of one single thread against the natural un-wisdom of perception of a fragmented discrete object filled world. Most readers however do not believe and practise the natural wisdom of one-ness, apart from mere lip service. You are also not helping to understand that there will always be horrible differences that covers up the single substratum beneath, IMO. Instead you are highlighting the resentment filled political points. Your attempt to prove that varNa is a blot (after proving that guna-varNa means jAti) is mischievous, as per me.

We have been taught that the jAti differences are the eternal natural outcome of differentiation of homogeneous Purusha into five breaths for the purpose of bringing forth life force, which is the world. See how murderous and war prone the civilisations that have not been taught so are. Compare it with our situation. It is not a statement of pride but a call for a rational contemplation.


Om Namah Shivay

atanu
28 March 2010, 03:19 AM
Namaste Shri Nara and friends

Though not apparent, the core of this discussion still hinges on non-appreciation of Advaita that teaches that there is a single fundamental principle that alone is the truth. This is taught as "The Truth is One. Sages call it by different names". The same is also taught when Bhagwan says Chatur varnya are from me.

Sri Madhusudan Saraswati has in his brilliant way answered all possible objections to Advaita in his work Advaita Siddhi. I do not have any doubt. Shri Madhusudan begins by saying that the objections to Advaita can arise due to two reasons: a) Genuine non-comprehension and b) Intentional mis-represenatation due to egoistic attachement to a single faith. He has taken up every objection and shown the truth of the one fundamental principle. Anyone interested can read Advaita Siddhi to understand the brilliance. Yet that is not for every one, since it is very involved -- as involved as the questions raised.

I prefer two very simple logic. First, if the Truth is one, then what that Truth (you as Atman) imagines of a second entity (the world or Ishwara) can only be an imagination. It is imagination by the True of a non-existent entity. Thus Shri Krishna is Sat and Asat. Second, if the scripture asks us to know the Truth of Advaita Atman, then the knowing cannot involve knowing of a knower and another known. Scripture has very skillfully used the word "Advaita Atman". Knowing Advaita Atman cannot lead to knowing of another Atman.

It is for you to stay fixed or to explore with genuine openness.

My Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
28 March 2010, 03:48 AM
Namaste Shri Nara and friendsIt is for you to stay fixed or to explore with genuine openness.

My Regards
Om Namah Shivaya

Namaste Shri Nara

I think it is an irony that you hold, on one hand, that the world is true as the body of Brahman, who is the core and rest is His attributes, and on the other hand, hold that varNa is a blot. Are you inferring that Brahman has attributes that are blots?

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
28 March 2010, 07:54 AM
...
I think it is an irony that you hold, on one hand, that the world is true as the body of Brahman, who is the core and rest is His attributes, and on the other hand, hold that varNa is a blot. Are you inferring that Brahman has attributes that are blots?

Dear dear atanu, I am not sure whether this is deliberate or not, anyway let me tell you one more time, it is not I who holds jagat is the body of Brahman, VA does. It is not VA that holds varna a blot, I do. Bramman and his attributes are VA, not me. I don't believe in VA any more than I believe in A or D.

Cheers!

atanu
28 March 2010, 08:47 AM
Dear dear atanu, I am not sure whether this is deliberate or not, anyway let me tell you one more time, it is not I who holds jagat is the body of Brahman, VA does. It is not VA that holds varna a blot, I do. Bramman and his attributes are VA, not me. I don't believe in VA any more than I believe in A or D.

Cheers!


Namaste Shri Nara

Thank you. So, finally you come to say "I don't believe in VA any more than I believe in A or D". Earlier, I think, that the stand was a bit different (or our perception was a bit different) and thus we participated in a lengthy thread.

This only increases my respect for you. Now we can discuss the present issue unencumbered.

Pranam and Regards.

Om Namah Shivaya

vivendi
28 March 2010, 10:38 AM
Namaste Shri Nara

Thank you. So, finally you come to say "I don't believe in VA any more than I believe in A or D". Earlier, I think, that the stand was a bit different (or our perception was a bit different) and thus we participated in a lengthy thread.

Dear Atanu, it is like this. "I don't owe allegience to any school, thats why I am unbiased (although I do follow some principles in life such as Buddhism and Dawkins which I carefully use in my discussions very little. Most of the time I let people argue against VA or D while silently sitting on the fence and watching them go against one another). Whereas you Atanu since you swear by Advaita, you are highly biased. I don't owe allegience to any guru or faith. I am not an apologist (My motive is to prove atheism)."

"I am a rationalist and really do not get aggravated when you argue against VA or D because I am not fond of either, (although I have an innate love towards Buddha and his faith). I take whatever I like in this world and am free unlike you who is bound by your love towards your faith. All in all Atanu, I have a good impartial heart and love all beings who are for or against my principles (who knows whats in my heart, I write it so I can get some pleasure praising my own self)"

Seems to be a great reason for rationalistic arguments. Atanu, do you really think I am unbiased? Do you really think I am rational? Do you really think I am impartial? Do you?

atanu
28 March 2010, 11:21 AM
Dear Atanu, it is like this. "I don't owe allegience to any school, thats why I am unbiased (although I do follow some principles in life such as Buddhism and Dawkins which I carefully use in my discussions very little. Most of the time I let people argue against VA or D while silently sitting on the fence and watching them go against one another). Whereas you Atanu since you swear by Advaita, you are highly biased. I don't owe allegience to any guru or faith. I am not an apologist (My motive is to prove atheism)."

"I am a rationalist and really do not get aggravated when you argue against VA or D because I am not fond of either, (although I have an innate love towards Buddha and his faith). I take whatever I like in this world and am free unlike you who is bound by your love towards your faith. All in all Atanu, I have a good impartial heart and love all beings who are for or against my principles (who knows whats in my heart, I write it so I can get some pleasure praising my own self)"

Seems to be a great reason for rationalistic arguments. Atanu, do you really think I am unbiased? Do you really think I am rational? Do you really think I am impartial? Do you?

Namaste Vivendi

:) :D

I think you are correct. Yet there are certain inexplicable facts that do not seem to fit. Or certain things are beyond my intellect. Or certain things are my imaginations.

From general point of view, no one is impartial as long as Atman is not shining in fullness. And then none actually is there to be impartial to others. That said, I will say that the forum has gained excellently recently; one gain being you and another Shri Nara. Both are excellent role players and have the capability to go above gunas.:) This is my opinion.

My next post for dear friend Devotee is more emotional.

Om namah Shivaya

atanu
28 March 2010, 11:43 AM
Namaste Saidevo ji,

We both are in similar situation, though a bit differently. You criticised Gandhi's political policies and now are taking support of his views on Varna theory. On the other hand, I supported his political policies and now, am against his views (which was unknown to me till you told us all).

I think the situation is much more serious for me than it appears. That way I am against the views of my revered god-like Acharaya Sri Shankara too ( I need to go into in-depth study what he actually felt on this issue as not very clear picture emerges from one or two out-of-context quotes). On this forum, my views are against the views of Atanu and you .... who have been my very good spiritual friends on Advaita Vedanta ... and sadly, I almost fought with my dear friend Ganeshprasad ji on this issue. :(

In the light of the above facts, I think I should change my status vis-a-vis yours ---- Dear Saidevo ji, my situation is too bad as compared to yours. Please pray for me. :)

OM

My Friend Devotee

I will state Advaita in my own fashion.

You (and me and everyone) are as good as Einstein (the renowned Brahmana of present age) and not better than the most hated criminal, just as a piece of wood on funeral pyre and a great piece of wooden artwork are of same wood. However, each form of wood has its own role to play, assigned by the Mayi -- the Lord of Shakti. This is in this phenomenal world. In this phenomenal world, varNa is the natural outcome which again leads to more solidified divisions in the waking Universe.

So varNa is actually totally transparent, since Atman is transparent. Who will mind any work whatsoever, if it was known that the work is a role palyed by Ishwara alone? It is easy for a Brahmana to play his natural role and it is easy for any other to perform their natural roles. But adhaysa complicates the picture. Our opinions based on wrong assumptions give colour to that which is neutral.

Shri Krishna teaches that due to residence of Ishwara in heart of all, the beings rotate like automaton. I did not understand this till I read Shankara carefully. He says: from without beginning there has been two way superimposition of Atman's intelligence on inert Mind (internal instrument of Atman) and of inertness of the Mind on the intelligent Atman.

I find Shankara not only a Jnani higher than the highest Jnani, but also a compassionate Lord. He, in stroke, frees the Jiva of all sins, which flow from this primeval natural error tying up the actors. If not freed thus, Jiva would wallow and cry forever. (this however is an egoistic statement from a puppet).

Best Wishes and regards

Om Namah Shivaya

saidevo
28 March 2010, 12:54 PM
namaste.

Nara said (post #49)

Later, he ends up with a butcher called Dharmavyaada. This butcher shows all the qualities of a Brahmin, yet not a Brahmin because he was not born one. Seeing how wise Dharmavyada was, Kausikan implores him to give up his lowly occupation of a butcher. For this, Dharmavyada explains that following Varnashrama darma is paramount. His birth in this varna was due to the sins he committed in his previous birth. He further explains that the only way to be released from his sins is to faithfully follow the varna dharma ordained for his current birth. This exchange shows sins in one life will result in a birth in a low varna and whatever exalted gunas he may have, he still have to practice the varna dharma.

Here is a collection of messages list on the teachings of DharmavyAdha:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15759921/Dharmavyadha

Some gems from his teachings, with my leading thoughts:

• varNa by birth, yet practised with a feeling of pride and nobility:

kulOchitamidam karma pitru-paitAmaham param
vartamAnasya mE dharmE svE manyum mA krithA dvija

This has been the family business for generations. I am born to this family and this karma is very appropriate for me, for I am born to this family of butchers. You do not have to feel sorry for me.

• Belief in the divine prescription of varNa by birth. If an entire family tree is given a specific varNa path by Brahma, it means that in that family will be born souls that gravitate to that varNa with their past guNa-karma:

vidhAtrA vihitam pUrvam karma svamaanupAlayan
prayatnAccha guru vriddhou shushrUshE aham dvijOttama

On top of it, this is not my chosen profession. This karma is prescribed by Brahma (the creator) to my family. I am following the karma prescribed to the family I am born to, dutifully and devotedly caring to the needs of my old parents.

karma shUdrE krishih vaishyE sangrAmE kshatriyE smritah
Brahmacharyam tapO mantrAh satyam cha brAhmaNe sadA

service of people by shUdra, agriculture, dairy and business by vaishya, dutiful rulership and fighting by kshatriya, brahmacharya (control of sense organs), tapas (austerity), study of scriptures and observing satya (truthfulness) for Brahmins are the division of labor prescribed by Brahma.

• The best that a varNa can obtain is a current dhArmic life and a heavenly afterlife:

krishi gOraksha vANijyam iha lOkasya jIvanam
danDanItih trayI vidyA tEna lOkO bhavatyuta

agriculture, dairy and business are the means of living in this world; Rulership (danDanIti) and study of the three vEdas are the means for achieving other worlds (para lOka)

*****

• adharma and varNa sAnkarya:

vyabhichArAn narEndrANam dharmah sankIryatE mahAn
adharmO vardhatE cha api sankIryantE tatah prajAh

If the king deviates from dharma in ruling the country, then adharma propagates throughout his kingdom, resulting in mixed breed among people (varNa sAnkarya).

bhErunDA vAmanAh kubjAh sthUlashIrshAh tathaiva cha
kLIbAh cha andAscha badhirA jAyantE atyuccha lOchanAh

increasing adharma in this world, causes increasing birth of disproportionate bodied, short, ugly, and big headed people, and also deaf, blind, visually challenged and neuter people.

*****

• svadharma practised along with sAmAnya dharma:

satyam vadE nAbhyasUyE yathAshakti dadAmi cha
dEvata, atithi bhrityA nAmavashishTEna vartayE

I always speak only the truth. I do not have jealousy towards anybody. I offer charities, treat guests, feed employees, and only eat the remaining food.

Na kutsayAmi aham kinchinna garhE balavattaram
kritamnvEti kartAram purA karma dvijOttama

I will not make fun of any one, nor do I point out the bad behavior of a guilty. I will not accuse anyone, because a karma (good or bad karma) keeps following the doer of the karma.

yE chaiva mAm prashamsanti yE cha nindanti mAnavAh
sarvAn supariNitEna karmaNa tOshayAmyaham

I treat equally, the person who praises me or accuses me; I treat the cultured people with appropriate protocol.

*****

• Dharma in all occupations:
A butcher is not a hunter after all...:

parENa hi hatAn brahman varAha mahishAn aham
Na svayam hanmi viprarshE vikrINAmi sadA tvaham

O! Brahmin, though I am a a butcher by birth, I will not kill the animals. I will sell the meat of buffaloes and pigs, that are butchered by others.

...and a butcher need not necessarily eat meat or be cruel:

na bhakshyAmi mAmsAni ruthugAmi tathA hi aham
sadA upavAsI cha tathA naktabhOjI sadA dvija

However, I do not eat meat and have not eaten meat until today. I meet with my wife only at appropriate times. I will fast all day and eat only in the night. Though my varNa-dharma is cruel, I don't have to be cruel.

ashIlascha api purushO bhUtvA bhavati shIlavAn
prANihimsA-ratascha api bhavatE dhArmikah punah

One can be kind-hearted, even following a cruel occupation. This is my experience. One becomes cultured through undivided devotion to God. Even Conducting a cruel business, he can be a follower of dharma.

*****

Nara
28 March 2010, 02:33 PM
Hello folks, greetings!

This is my final post on scriptural evidence that shows family of birth is a factor in determining one’s varna. In this post I will be presenting evidence from Chandogya Upanishad.

The story of Satyakama the son of Jabala and Gautama rishi is well known. The story is fascinating, and delivers a set of exquisite allegorical teachings. So, let us be clear, I am not trying to put down or bash this Upanishad in anyway. All I want to do is point to some facts that are relevant to the question we are discussing.

Driven by a desire to learn, Satyakama asks his poor mother for his gotram. She replies that as a servant maid in a rich man's house she had to serve many people in her youth. Therefore, she says, she does not know who his father was and consequently she doesn’t know what his gotra was. Jabala then says to him that he is to call himself simply Satyakama, son of Jabala.

Satyakama approaches Gautama rishi and asks to be his pupil. Gautama inquires what gotram he belongs to. Satyakama tells him exactly what his mother told him. Gautama declares only a Brahmana can be so truthful and accepts him as a pupil.

The reason for inquiring about gotra is to ascertain whether Satyakama was born into a varna eligible for Vedic study. Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study. Given that Gautama asked about his Gotra shows that the truth-telling nature of brahamanas that he saw in the boy is traced to Satyakama's unknown Gotra.

Varna system is often claimed as a perfect way to organize a society. This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed. At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.

I will now turn to showing why I think varna system is a blot on Hinduism. I will do so under a new thread in the Hot Topics section. Please stay tuned, if you are interested.

Cheers!

Nara
28 March 2010, 08:50 PM
...I once again ask you to provide (i) the exact Sanskrit text or the chapter and verse reference, not some title a translator has provided, or (ii) accept you made a mistake. I have a feeling this is too much to ask.

Dear atanu, perhaps I am wrong, but I feel like you are ignoring this request of mine. If my understanding is wrong I am eager to correct it.

From what I have read, in this section of Sri Bhashyam, Bhagavat Ramanuja only severely criticizes the untenability of the advaitin's rejection of pratyaksham and yet holding on to shruti which is cognizable only through pratyaksham, a kind of circular argument. Nowhere does he say that pratyaksham is a stronger pramana than shruti.

Bhagavat Ramanuja's criticism of Advaitam is not at issue here. Please do not obfuscate by turning the discussion to that. What is at issue is your claim that for Bhagavat Ramanuja Pratyaksham is stronger than Shruti based solely one one source, that too an English translation, and furthermore a title that is not in the original.

I once again request you to provide Bhagavat Ramanuja's original text, at least the exact verse reference, or withdraw your claim. Your intellectual integrity is at stake here. Please be as forthright as what you will want your opponents to be if the table was turned.

Thank you....

atanu
29 March 2010, 12:25 AM
Dear atanu, perhaps I am wrong, but I feel like you are ignoring this request of mine. If my understanding is wrong I am eager to correct it.

From what I have read, in this section of Sri Bhashyam, Bhagavat Ramanuja only severely criticizes the untenability of the advaitin's rejection of pratyaksham and yet holding on to shruti which is cognizable only through pratyaksham, a kind of circular argument. Nowhere does he say that pratyaksham is a stronger pramana than shruti.

Thank you....

namaste Nara

Not perhaps, but you are wrong. I have told you thrice that I do not have the original sanskrit. I go by Thibaut's translation. No VA proponent has ever condemned Thibaut's translation. If you thinbk it is wrong then you kindly take appropriate action, instead of finding fault with me. It surprises me no end that despite my telling you three times that I do not have the sanskrit original, you are insisting on that. I also said that if you feel happy, then kindly consider me wrong. I have no problem.

Now the logic you give above (highlighted in red) as to what actually is the content of the paragraph under contest is very well known to me. But it is surprising that you do not know what Sri Ramanuja is criticising of Shankara. You do not know the context.

For Advaita, Prayaksha is a valid proof. You are wrong to state that Advaita rejects pratyaksha.

But, Shankara says in case of Pratyaksha and sruti conflict, sruti has to be given importance. Shankara says that Veda is not for stating the obvious. We all know that when we are thirsty we must drink water. Veda does not have to do it. Veda teaches us that which is not amenable to Senses and Mind. For example, Mind never comes to know and will never believe that Atman is Eko. So, Veda teaches that. This excellent pure logic of Shankara, Sri Ramanuja takes up for dispute.:) What else can I say?

Kindly take a deeper look. If you wish, I will restate the whole thing. For example, I say that it does not appear to me that the earth is round. You, as my Professor, recommend a science book to me as authorative on the subject. But Saidevo says: Shri Nara is giving wrong advice.

Frankly speaking, I find Sri Ramanuja devoid of logic. This is not to hurt but only a statement of my understanding. We have seen the outcome of VA as to how all negative karmas will taint Brahman if the Universe is Brahman's body. Still, if you consider me wrong, please do so. But please take action and tell the world that Thibaut mis-translated.

(But it also surprises me now why you want me to declare that I was wrong, if you are not a VA votary? Oh. Forget it atanu. there may be so many valid reasons for an impartial person to ask that of you. )

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
29 March 2010, 12:39 AM
Varna system is often claimed as a perfect way to organize a society. This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed. At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.

Cheers!

Namaste Nara

Who said so?

And, as if a poor woman will not have any chance of ill treatment in any other society? I ask you are you logical at all? From all posts of yours only contradictions peer out. The Satyakama story does not tell what you are imagining and superimposing. The story does not say that Sataykama's mother slept with anyone as per the requirement of society. It is imagination of a biased and perhaps a putrid mind.

The story says what Devotee and Grames are pointing out. Though, normally varNa is linked with birth only, but whenever a proof of good intention and good character is available, varNa considerations are transcended. It only shows that the system is not rigid. The truth of any issue is more imporatnt. Kindly do not imagine.

Om Namah Shivaya

isavasya
29 March 2010, 01:00 AM
The reason for inquiring about gotra is to ascertain whether Satyakama was born into a varna eligible for Vedic study. Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study. Given that Gautama asked about his Gotra shows that the truth-telling nature of brahamanas that he saw in the boy is traced to Satyakama's unknown Gotra.
Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed. At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.

I will now turn to showing why I think varna system is a blot on Hinduism.

Cheers!

Namaste Nara,



I am sorry to say your previous post was most contradictory, baseless and totally against what real scripture says. You wrote that satyakama's truth speaking confirmed that he could only be a brahmin, but verses tell gautama says no one but a true brahmin speaks the truth , you havent tilted from truth so I will take you my child, there by that adhyaya ends.As for asking about gotra, even japaneese martial art teacher asks their pupils about their lineage when they first come, as in general life we dont assume people we meet to be a orphan!! What illogical explanation you gave has been floated by few sampradays of south India, now two things mate -:



1.Chandogya upanishad is very clear, the exact verses from upnishad clearly points the rishi gautama says, you havent drifted from truth so You are fit to be my student, not what you say.



2. To further reply to other people who give this explanation, well the same people also believe inter-caste as sin, and a child of imaginary brahmin father + shudra mother = Chandaal from their own belief. In short Rishi gautama wont take a chandaal. so their explanation is contradictory and always wrong. Also your assumption that ''one Brahmin availed of her services'' is imaginary and contradictory to character of a true brahmana, so absolutely wrong.





So let me make clear in sanatan dharm janma is not the deciding factor but gyan and karma, which also constitutes varna system. and this Varna sytem is natural and self born and exists from eternity and it is not a blot but makes sanatam dharm great!!! Illegal children are despised every where in world and particularly in ancient times they were taken as direct reflection of sin by most other religions and yet you see the greatness of sanatan dharm, satyakama a illegitimate child of a prostitute too is accepted in society and in ashram because of his goodness and goes on to become writer of many Upanishads and realizer of Brahman. Such is greatness of sanatan dharm!!





And Nara I personally request you not to give your own assumed explanations, and if you do please write that you are implying your own understandings of the verses.

devotee
29 March 2010, 01:29 AM
Namaste Saidevo ji and Atanu,

It was heartening to know your views when we have slightly contradictory views.

Yes, Atanu, It is Brahman alone who is playing different roles here. :)

OM

grames
29 March 2010, 01:54 AM
Dear Atanu,

This thread has deviated too far already and i am responding to your message very late.

Different school interpret this "varna" differently and that is the reason why i didn't step in to explaining this but you have already given one nice meaning here..

varNa a covering , cloak , mantle ; a cover , lid ; outward appearance , exterior , form , figure , shape , colour

Covering what? Mantle of what? There are different possible explanations.

1. It can be the covering of "maya" on the pure Brahman ( as per A)
2. It can be the degree of association with triguna maya ( as per most Vaishnava Schools VA and ABA etc.)
3. It is intrinsic nature of the Atman itself ( as per D) but not fixed as the gradation structure is permanent but not the grade of the Atman.

And wonderfully, all the above are at least "determined" eternally and if "karma" is taught as the root cause, all school agree that such Karma is Anadi which again justifies the "varna" as eternal. Hope you agree.

You subsequent statements are sometimes misleading if not understood properly. VarnaAsrama will not and never be understood as "jati" Dharma and i am sure devotee has given so many examples for that stand. Since, varna is for Atman and the cause itself is eternal, it is in fact foolish to classify some "soul" as Brahmana, vaishya etc. with respect to their bodily designation and destination.

I do agree to Kanchi seer to most extend but i feel he did not differentiate the Jati Dharma from Varna Dharma in clear cut terms. SvaDharma can only mean your "varna" Dharma and same time i am not denouncing the "jati" Dharma in total as it is nothing but your material life style and privileges. What the Kanchi Seer sees as exceptions are in fact, with honesty and truth are examples of "varna" Dharma and not sure why they are "projected" as exceptions.

If we happen to admit and believe that, everyone that are born in to Brahmin parents becomes Brahmana or everyone who gets birth as Sudra remain as Sudra, i would simply ask you to reread what 'Devotee' has presented in this thread and explain those 'exceptions" and also the cause of such exceptions to take place. OTOH, if you agree and understand that "varna" is not same as "jati" then you can very convincingly understand those so called "exceptions" are natural and that is what constitute the "varna" in the VarnAshrama Dharma.

devotee
29 March 2010, 02:17 AM
Dear Nara,

I am losing interest in this topic. However, I would like to point out something :

a) Your quote from Ramanuja actually proves otherwise than what you claim. The correct translation doesn't support your views.

b) You couldn't provide any evidence from BG that Krishna supported Varna by "birth" theory.

c) You fail to see that Vidura was a highly respected advisor to Dhritrashtra. There was no ban on him on reading the scriptures and taking part in the court activities and his Neeti is respected even today. This is in spite of the fact, that once Duryodhana called him a Sudra in a fit of anger.

You also fail to see that there are many places in Mahabharata which refute the Varna by birth theory as quoted by me in my post.

d) You claim that Vidura should have been considered a Brahmin as his father was Brahmin. As per Manusmriti, he was a Sudra. You fail to see that Maharishi Vyaas himself was a Nishad, a Sudra, if we accept the Varnashankara theory of Manusmriti. In fact, the entire clan of Pandavas and Kauravas was actually Sudra if we go by their lineage.

If that was so, then please think :

i) In the Mahabharata period, some people did believe in Varna by birth theory. But it didn't have a wider acceptance in society. Such views have been expressed by only those people who never enjoyed a high place in the minds of people. Vidura, a Sudra, by birth should have been doing the task of a boat man yet he was doing all works like a Brahmin ! He should have no place in the court of Dhritrashtra .... but it was not so. Even Lord Krishna held Vidura in high esteem.
ii) If Vyaas was forced to follow Manusmriti strictly, he would have spent his entire life ferrying people across water bodies. We would have no Mahabharata, no Bhagwad Gita no 18 Purananas today !
iii) Lord Krishna should have been rearing cows and selling milk and the BG would not have been available to us today. If you think Vaishya is a paapyoni as (mis)translated by you, then Lord Krishna actually belonged to a Paapyoni !
iv) Maharishi Parashar would have been forced to work as a boatman or as a chandal burning dead bodies in cremation ground as he was born to a Chandala woman.

e) The story of Jabala quoted by you from Chandogya Upanishad actually contradicts your assertion ... how can you fail to see this ? Once Jabala was born to a Sudra woman (i.e. a maidservant) ... the highest varna he could get is Sudra (even though he might have been fathered by a Brahmin). Didn't the Rishi know this rule ? When fathered by any varna, he can never be considered a Brahmin, why the Rishi called him a Brahmin at all and accepted him as his disciple ?

The funny point in your arguments seen is that your quote actually belies your assertions and you fail to see that ! This was seen even in Saguna-Nirguna Brahman discussion.

f) Now you have decided to prove that Varna and caste were same and this is a blot on Hindus. I would advise you to go through Indian History, ancient Indian history, the details penned down by the Chinese pilgrims in 400 AD and before that, the Punjab Census of 1881, the Madras Presidency 1822 Survey, assimilation of foreign invaders into Hindu society, the history of Sudra Kings who were accepted as Kshatriyas etc. .... & you will find that :

i) this Manusmriti advocated Varna by birth theory was never strictly followed by the Hindus in the entire history of the Hindus. Every sect, every village, every caste in a certain part of India followed a custom & rules of its own and which was certainly not in accordance with Manusmriti. This became strict only after the British came to India as it suited their policy of divide and rule.
ii) Except the status of the Scheduled castes, the so-called "Other backward classes" were as prosperous as the Brahmins ... in fact, they were more often than not, much better off than the Brahmins economically and in social power structure. The Yadvas, the Kurmis, the Banias, the Jats, the Khatris, the Meenas of Rajasthan, the Koiris in North India ... there were economically and socially very powerful in general as compared to the Brahmins.
iii) As per accepted norm in Hindu society, the son was expected to take up the occupation of his father .... but it was never forced upon them. This was more of a division of labour which suited the entire society and not because of following the Manusmriti strictly.

OM

saidevo
29 March 2010, 02:54 AM
namaste Nara.

I am aghast at your following comment on the ChAndogya UpaniShad verse 4.4.2 wherein JabAla, SatyakAma's mother replies as to why she did not know his gotra.



Varna system is often claimed as a perfect way to organize a society. This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed. At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.


As someone said wisely here in HDF, "you see what you want to see." What in the verse gave you this kind of liberty to interpret it? The word "parichAriNi"? You should be knowing that the word means a 'maidservant'.

Does the word 'parichArinI' mean a prostitute who serves "many guests in bed"? In fact that is what PrabhupAda reads into it: "Satyakama Jabala. This Satyakama was the son of a prostitute. He was not a brahmana's son." (http://www.prabhupadavani.org/main/Bhagavatam/006.html)

Would then be every parichArak a gigolo? Just because you think 'varNa is blot on Hinduism', would you make such licentious translations and implications of lofty Hindu verses such as found in the UpaniShads?

Here are the correct translations/implications of the verse Ch.Up.4.4.2:

From Shankara BhAshya
http://www.sankaracharya.org/chandogya_upanishad.php

2. She said to him: "I do not know, my child, of what ancestry you are. In my youth I was preoccupied with many household duties and with attending on guests when I conceived you. I do not know of what ancestry you are. I am Jabala by name and you are Satyakama. So you may speak of yourself as Satyakama Jabala (the son of Jabala).

From Puri Maharaj
http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/topic_2166.html

When her son asked her about his father, Jabala answered, “I don’t know in which gotra you were born.” Her son then asked, “Why don’t you know?” She answered, “I used to be engaged in my husband’s house. Then I was so busily engaged in household work, serving guests and so on, that I was too absorbed in service to remember things like the gotra. Then I had you when you were still young and your father died. So now I am a widow and I don’t know your gotra. My name is Jabala and you are Satyakama. So you can tell your teacher that you are Jabala Satyakama (i.e. Satyakama, son of Jabala) when he asks you.

**********

Let us remember about the child marriage system practised in the Hindu Society until a century or so back. In all possibility JabAla would have been married in her young age and her husband might have predeceased her as Puri Maharaj implies. And the UpaniShads are not life stories or novels to give every detail about the personalities they speak of.

It is sad to see perverted thinking, even on the part of some Hindu sages, when their sole bent is to prove a point.

atanu
29 March 2010, 05:16 AM
Dear Atanu,
-varNa a covering , cloak , mantle ; a cover , lid ; outward appearance , exterior , form , figure , shape , colour

Covering what? Mantle of what? There are different possible explanations.
---
And wonderfully, all the above are at least "determined" eternally and if "karma" is taught as the root cause, all school agree that such Karma is Anadi which again justifies the "varna" as eternal. Hope you agree.

You subsequent statements are sometimes misleading if not understood properly. VarnaAsrama will not and never be understood as "jati" Dharma and i am sure devotee has given so many examples for that stand. Since, varna is for Atman and the cause itself is eternal, it is in fact foolish to classify some "soul" as Brahmana, vaishya etc. with respect to their bodily designation and destination.

I do agree to Kanchi seer to most extend but i feel he did not differentiate the Jati Dharma from Varna Dharma in clear cut terms. SvaDharma can only mean your "varna" Dharma and same time i am not denouncing the "jati" Dharma in total as it is nothing but your material life style and privileges. What the Kanchi Seer sees as exceptions are in fact, with honesty and truth are examples of "varna" Dharma and not sure why they are "projected" as exceptions.

If we happen to admit and believe that, everyone that are born in to Brahmin parents becomes Brahmana or everyone who gets birth as Sudra remain as Sudra, i would simply ask you to reread what 'Devotee' has presented in this thread and explain those 'exceptions" and also the cause of such exceptions to take place. OTOH, if you agree and understand that "varna" is not same as "jati" then you can very convincingly understand those so called "exceptions" are natural and that is what constitute the "varna" in the VarnAshrama Dharma.

Namaste Grames

Thank you for your response.

I have reservation when you say that varNa is for Atman. Actually the fourfold division is of Purusha, as is very clear from Purusha Suktam. Even in case of Purusha, it only the functions performed by Prakritic Gunas that create this apparent division.

Quite early in the thread, varNa and jAti were differentiated as having two different meanings. But i also agreed that varNa, which is actually a spiritual concept has to have manifestation in waking universe. This way the spiritual varNa and manifested being is linked. The very fact that upanishads talk of purification through karma, through studies etc. indicate that varNa is not a fixed thing for an individual jiva, though the four classes are eternal.

When dharma requires certain karma/rites right from birth and at certain ages, it is reasonable to understand that varNa has direct linkage with birth. This is also proven on account of two major spiritual reasons. The fruit of all activity, including the future birth, is decided by karma in the present birth. The second point relates to Shri Krishna directly saying that He is the origin/creator of these four fold divisions. It is unreasonable to assume that the fourfold divisions will not take equivalent manifestation in world.

It is not unreasonable to say the followings:

varNa has link to various parts/functionalities of Purusha' body. varNa of a jiva can very well decide as to what kind of voaction/rites will be most suitable. Accordingly, it is Sarvesvara (as Krishna) who created the fourfold divisions.
Since there is no manifest indication of one's varna, the ordained system is one of usefulness and not for exploitation (which however is again natural like every other ill of society). How will one or one's parents know of one's varNa and carry out the appropriate rites?
However there are numerous examples that this linkage between varNa and jAti was not meant to be rigid. The Satyakama story and several other are proofs.
It is also probable that exploitation of the system took place. But we as spiritual people believe that Ishwara distributes the karma phala.
It may also be true that for kali yuga some modifications/lessening of rigidity is required. Yet, the four varNna classes, will remain and the image of the four varNa classes in four corresponding social divisions will remain.Think the alternative situation kindly. If varNa is not reflected in jAti, then why should Shri Krishna talk about fourfold divisions of varNa? And who then knows about it, if there is no linkage to the visible world? The only direct linkage could be the birth, since that surely is controlled by Ishwara.

Secondly, how are we debating the obnoxious claim that "varNa is a blot", if varNa was not manifest in some form??

But I agree with you as well as Devotee that the rigidity of casteism might have often exceeded prescribed limits and Hinduism has weakened. But we do not have to buy the argument of western observers always since they cannot explain the violence and inequity in their societies.

IMO, what is being touted here by Shri Nara is a political position, based on some biased analysis and imagination. These views get stronger due to our own differences. Plainly we are confusing the spiritual and the political. It is almost like the legs and the feet fighting against each other and claiming supremacy or ill treatment, instigated by a third party. We are forgetting that Purusha sacrifice divided purusha four fold as per functions of Mouth (brahmana), arms (kshatrya), thighs (vaishya) and feet (sudra). If Purushas mouth and thighs argue and fight against each other, then I think that mAyA is so very evident.


Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
29 March 2010, 07:11 AM
"
The actual verse where Sri Krishna speaks about the Varnashrama is Chapter 4 verse 13 which states

"cātur (http://vedabase.net/c/catur)-varṇyaḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/varnyam) mayā (http://vedabase.net/m/maya) sṛṣṭaḿ (http://vedabase.net/s/srstam)
guṇa (http://vedabase.net/g/guna)-karma (http://vedabase.net/k/karma)-vibhāgaśaḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vibhagasah)
tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) kartāram (http://vedabase.net/k/kartaram) api (http://vedabase.net/a/api) māḿ (http://vedabase.net/m/mam)
viddhy akartāram (http://vedabase.net/a/akartaram) avyayam (http://vedabase.net/a/avyayam)
"
translation
"According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable."


Namaste All,

That has always been the point.

Although, Atman is akartāram (http://vedabase.net/a/akartaram) avyayam (http://vedabase.net/a/avyayam), the varNa is always in the realm of guna-karma, which is the world of birth and death. There is no way that these four basic divisions will ever be missing in any place and at any time. And the basic divisions cannot come up in the world on their own unless people are born with 4 basic traits. Has anyone ever taken birth without inborn traits, instincts, and capabilities, in short without a genetic makeup?


Let us go above the emotions and analyse whether a particular birth is in control of a common person or is in the hand of Ishwara? We dont have any way to create the genetic makeup that we are born with. But we do not appear to believe in shastra that it is mental gunas that only create conditions for repeated birth, and we have ways also to purify the guna composition, though prescribed work. What will one choose? Being born with a genetic makeup that one cannot control or being born with a guna makeup that one can improve through prescribed work and get a better birth or become birth free?

If we think that there is a blot in varNa system, then we must find the blot in Ishwara -- and that we have to agree is out of question. :) And has anyone ever said that "the understanding of Genes" is a blot? Whereas, the understanding of genes is so incomplete; in a dead body, the genes are as dead as the dead body -- but yet we (Shri Nara actually) say that genes are all that there is.

In Behavioural science a debate rages on, without resolution, whether the environment or the genetic makeup make a man? But in guna-karma-vArNa we already have an answer and practical guidance to get rid of the adversities.

Om Namah Shivaya

vivendi
29 March 2010, 08:52 AM
Hello folks, greetings!

This is my final post on scriptural evidence that shows family of birth is a factor in determining one’s varna. In this post I will be presenting evidence from Chandogya Upanishad.

The story of Satyakama the son of Jabala and Gautama rishi is well known.

How does this story prove that varna is based on birth? It proves just the opposite. Gautama rishi takes Satyakama based on the truth he says, not by confirming that he was born to a brahmin.


I will now turn to showing why I think varna system is a blot on Hinduism. I will do so under a new thread in the Hot Topics section. Please stay tuned, if you are interested.So far you have not proved by citing VA sources (doubtful) that varna is based on birth. Exactly the opposite. Now it will be interesting to see how you will prove varna is a blot on hinduism. Possibly arguing against it I suppose http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Nara
29 March 2010, 11:22 AM
Hi folks, I wish to respond to some of the comments on my last post.

Brother Saidevo, I never said “paricharini” meant Jabala was a prostitute. Even if it meant that, which I did not say and am not saying now, it is not a reflection of Jabala’s character at all. In fact I think the story itself is very uplifting, all three characters come out as great role models for us all. Jabala made an honest living as a servant maid and did not feel any reason to hide anything, Satyakama was honest and proud to have his mother’s name after his own, and Gautama readily accepted him even though his birth lineage could not be established definitively. My problem is not with these three. I respect all three.

Please consider the verse carefully, Jabala says to Satyakama that she does not know his Gotra, and then she states the reason for this as, in her youth she served a lot of people and had Satyakama (बह्वहं चरन्ति परिचारिणी यौवने त्वामलभे). If we take mother Jabala at her own words, I don’t know why we should not, the reason she does not know his gotra is because she served many in her youth and had Satyakama. With this, I am convinced what I wrote is accurate. If you disagree, please state your reasons.

Here is the original text for your convenience.

सा हैन्मुवाच नाहमेतद्वे्द तात यद्गोत्रस्त्वमसि बह्वहं चरन्ति परिचारिणी यौवने
त्वामलभे साहमेतन्न वेद य्द्गोत्रस्त्वमसि जबाला तु नामाहमस्मि सत्यकामो नाम
त्वमसि स सत्यकाम एव जाबालो ब्रुविथा इति Saidevo, you are accusing me of licentious translation, and yet you are ready to cite Puri Maharaj’s, which is way out in the left field (outside the boundary line). I am not making any value judgment on the conduct of Jabala at all. In fact I admire her very much. As I said earlier, the actions of all three were exemplary. I wish more people model their actions after them, and that includes me as well.

Isavasya, you think I tilted the truth, but I think not, and that is fine. The very fact Gauthama asked for Satyakama’s gotra indicates to us the criterion to accept him as a pupil included birth in a Brahmin family. Japanese martial arts teacher asking for lineage does not negate the fact Gautama did as well. But to his credit, Gautama readily accepted Satyakama as his student.

You are right about Manu smrithi of course. These contradictions do not negate the fact gotra played an important part of gurukulam, and it still does. I don’t know what to make of these contradictions, except perhaps, the powerful could bend the rules, as they do even today. Some good folks like Gautama bend the rules also and more of us should follow Gautama's example than that of Dronacharya. But sadly, we have only Dronocharyas in our midst in today's world, not many Gautamas. Be that as it may, denying any role for birth in determining varna as described in Hindu scriptures is untenable. In this context, let me point out what I said in my very first post in this thread.

"Before I begin, a caveat is probably in order. As far as the extent to which actual facts can be gleaned from rigorous scientific inquiry, Varna and caste has (sic) not remained strictly insular. There is not a whole lot of genetic deviation among the various castes. The implication of whatever genetic differences and/or similarities discovered among the different castes, and among the populations from other regions of the world, is not clear cut. Leaving these aside, I would like to present evidence from Hindu scripture that the Varna system is a birth-based system, even during the Vedic times."
Whether Sanatana Darma is the best or not, I won't comment on at this point.

Devotee, we have a disagreement with what Srimat BG says about papayoni. My interpretation is consistent with that of all the mainstream Hindu philosophical schools. With respect to Vidura, I quoted his own words. Itihasa puranas have lots of contradictory things. But that does not mean birth did not play any role at all in determining one's varna. Some exceptions were obviously made. I don’t know why these exceptions were made, I will be interested to know. But I am unable to accept your position that varna was determined solely by guna and action.

Thank you for a spirited debate…

vivendi
29 March 2010, 12:31 PM
Devotee, we have a disagreement with what Srimat BG says about papayoni. My interpretation is consistent with that of all the mainstream Hindu philosophical schools. With respect to Vidura, I quoted his own words. Itihasa puranas have lots of contradictory things. But that does not mean birth did not play any role at all in determining one's varna. Some exceptions were obviously made. I don’t know why these exceptions were made, I will be interested to know. But I am unable to accept your position that varna was determined solely by guna and action.

Consistent with which mainstream hindu philosophical school? It is not even consistent from one post to another.

The fact that Gautama choose Satyakama out of his nature rather than birth is proof enough that he choose him because he knew Satyakama was a brahmin. If the criteria was to choose disciples by birth, why would Gautama asked that question to Satyakama in the first place when he knew it first hand himself? This shows that your knowledge of all mainstream hindu schools is just on the surface, yet you say you have scrutinized them all with a scientific bent of mind. I am not sure now whether you err on the basics, because you also do that on advanced topics of the upanishads. Showing off verses in native scripts can be done by anyone, but the explanations can be highly biased. Scientific scrutiny, eh!

atanu
29 March 2010, 12:46 PM
Namaste Friends

Brahmana is said to be the mouth of Purusha, wherefrom a falsity cannot be expected.

It is true that Haridrumata Gautama enquired of satyakAma's lineage. But in case, the lineage is not known for any reason, what will be the criteria? The verses cited suggest that the ability to state facts/truth without feeling of being ashamed (which happens on account of a false idea of ego), is the prime criterion here. This is true humility and absence of false vanity. Gautama says: A non-brahmana will not be able to say thus, and goes ahead to induct the pupil.

It is actually naive to see anything wrong in the practise. If a candidate was to be selected for a warrior postion, would not a test for Kshatriya characteristics be in perfect order? Similarly, if I were to be appointed the head of Tata family, would not there be 99 % chance that I would destroy the whole business?

So, I see only practical wisdom based on knowledge of the spirit and its ways.

As of now, I feel uncomfortable with Shri Nara's conclusions. At one end he says he admires all three characters. At the other end, he is not ready to extend his admiration to the upanishad, wherein the three characters belong and to the teaching, which is a pillar of Sanatana dharma, wherein Sri Nara detects blots.

I always wonder at the inconsistencies.

Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
29 March 2010, 11:21 PM
Dear Nara,


Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study. Given that Gautama asked about his Gotra shows that the truth-telling nature of brahamanas that he saw in the boy is traced to Satyakama's unknown Gotra.

Congrats for being able to read the mind of Gautama ! ... and you claim that you don't manipulate and extrapolate the texts to brew the meaning that is in your mind ?


Varna system is often claimed as a perfect way to organize a society. This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed. At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.

Perhaps, you were alive in Gautama and Jabala's time to claim all this ... as it is no where in the scripture ! You may also be knowing the names of men who slept with Jabala ? And the greatest part of it is that even though Jabala was unable to know who fathered Satyakama but you know it for sure that it was a Brahmin .... great ! You appear to have the finer details of Jabala's sexual behaviour and sexual encounters and their results !! That is really remarkable, sir !

OM

saidevo
30 March 2010, 01:11 AM
namaste Nara.

I am aware of the original Sanskrit text of the verse (Ch.Up.4.4.2), whose transliteration is as follows:

sA hainamuvAcha na aham etat veda tAta yadgotrastvamasi
bahvahaM charantI parichAriNI yauvane tvAmalabhe
sAhametanna veda yadgotrastvamasi jabAlA tu nAmAhamasmi
satyakAmo nAma tvamasi sa satyakAma eva jAbAlo
bravIthA iti || 4.4.2 ||

sA--she, enam--to him, uvAcha--said: "tAta--my child, tvam--you, yat-jotraH--of what lineage, asi--are, etat--this, aham--I, na veda--don't know. aham--I, bahu charanti--who was engaged in many works, parichAriNI--as a housemaid, yauvena--in my youth, tvAm--you, alabhe--got; sA--having been such, aham--I, tvam--you, yat-gotraH--of what lineage, asi--are, etat--this, na veda--could not know. aham--I, tu--however, jabAlA--JabAlA, nAma--by name, asmi--am, tvam--you, satyakAmaH--SatyakAma, nAma--named, asi--are. saH--that (so you), satyakAmaH--SatyakAma, jAbAlaH--JAbAla, eva--only as, bruvIthA--speak (of yourself).

2. She said to him, "My child, I do not know of what lineage you are. I, who was engaged in many works as a housemaid, got you in my youth. Having been such I could not know of what lineage you are. However, I am JabAlA by name and you are named SatyakAma. So you speak of yourself only as SatyakAma JAbAla."

*****

The translation given above is typical and literal. The inferences vary due to the underlined line of the text.

• The underlined text, IMO, has two parts:

bahvahaM charantI parichAriNI--I, who was engaged in many works as a housemaid;
yauvane tvAmalabhe--got you in my youth.

The two parts are two different declarations on the part of SatyakAma's mother.

In the first declaration, she says she was very busy working as a housemaid. The primary meaning of the word 'chara' is to walk, and it also means 'living, practising'. A typical housemaid is not of much intelligence, and busy attending to household chores.

In the second declaration, she says that she got--labhe (conceived) him in my youth--yauvane. This is the indication that makes Shankara, muni Ranga RAmAnuja and Puri Maharaj infer that she was married young and that her husband died early.

It would be grossly wrong IMO, to connect these two declarations and say that 'I ... as a housemaid got you in my youth', implying any extramarital relationship for a housemaid and a perversion for the Hindu society of those days to treat housemaids as sexual partners.

• If JabAlA was a concubine, would her son be named SatyakAma? Even this rhetorical question seems preposterous to me!

• If her husband was alive, couldn't she have known her son's gotra? The statement that she got her son when she was young, is strongly indicative that her husband is no longer around, rather than that she got her son from a stranger, going morally astray even when she was young.

• Remember, SatyakAma JAbAla turned out to be a Rishi. Here is the entry against his name in the PurAnic Encyclopedia, compiled by vettam maNi:

SATYAKAMA (SATYAKAMA JABALA).

A noble hermit. There is a story as given below, in the Chandogyopanisad about the greatness of this hermit.

As his father died in his boyhood, Satyakama was brought up by his mother Jabali. Whan it was time to begin education, the boy told his mother, "Mother, I would like to be educated under a teacher, in the Vedas. But I don't know what clan I belong to. What answer shall I give, when the teacher asks me about my clan?"

His mother Jabali replied. "I also do not know much about the clan of your father who married me when I was a girl. From that day onwards I was engaged in house-keeping. I did not ask your father about the clan. In my younger days I gave birth to you. Shortly after that your father died. Tell your teacher that you are Satyakama the son of Jabali."

Having heard this Satyakama went in search of a teacher. At last he reached the hermitage of the sage Gautama and told him every thing. The hermit was attracted by his truthfulness and behaviour. Believing that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, Gautama accepted him as a disciple. The hermit entrusted the boy with four hundred lean cows to look after. The boy accepted the work, and said to the hermit. "When this becomes a group of thousand fat cows, I will bring them back."

He lived in the forest looking after the cows. The Devas sympathised with him. Vayu (wind), the Sun, Agni (fire) and Prana together gave him divine knowledge and wisdom. After this Satyakama returned to the hermit Gautama with thousand fat cows.

Seeing the boy whose face shone with the light of God, the hermit was amazed. "Who gave you divine knowledge ?" asked the hermit. Satyakama told the hermit all that took place. Fully satisfied with the boy, Gautama imparted to h:m knowledge about the universal Soul (Paramatma) and Satyakama became a noble hermit.

Satyakama got several disciples of whom Upakosala was prominent. He approached Satyakama as a student. For twelve years he served his teacher and kept up the fire in the firepit for burnt offering, without being extinguished throughout the twelve years, and worshipped the fire god. Yet the teacher did not impart knowledge to him.

The teacher's wife recommended to her husband that Upakosala should be given learning. But the teacher was silent. UpakosalA took a vow and fast before the burnt-offering fire pit. Agni Deva felt pity for him and informed him that God is all-pervading and that his teacher would show him the way to God.

When he came to the teacher, his face was seen shining. Satyakama asked Upakosala for the reason. Upakosala told the teacher what the fire god had told him. Immediately Satyakama taught his disciple the path of yoga (union) by knowledge of the Sankhyas.

*****

Here is the Shankara-bhAShya for the verse:
http://www.sankara.iitk.ac.in/upnishad.php3?toption=13

जबाला तु नामाहमस्मि, सत्यकामो नाम त्वमसि, स त्वं सत्यकाम एवाहं जाबालोऽस्मीत्याचार्याय ब्रुवीथाः; यद्याचार्येण पृष्ट इत्यभिप्रायः ।

कस्मान्न वेत्सीत्युक्त्ता आह -- बहु भत्रुगृहे परिचर्याजातमतिथ्यभ्यागतादि चरन्ति अहं परिचारिणी परिचरन्तीति, परिचरणशीलौवाहम्, परिचरणचित्ततया गोत्रादिस्मरणे मम मनो नाभूत् ।

यौवने च तत्काले त्वामलभे लब्धवत्यस्मि ।

तदेव ते पितोपरत, अतोऽनाथा अहम्, साहमेतन्न वेद यद्गोत्रस्त्वमसि ।

जबाला तु नामाहमस्मि, सत्यकामो नाम त्वमसि, स त्वं सत्यकाम एवाहं जाबालोऽस्मीत्याचार्याय ब्रुवीथाः; यद्याचार्येण पृष्ट इत्यभिप्रायः ।

And here is the transliteration and translation by Puri Maharaj:

1. evaM pRSTA jabAlA sA hainaM putram uvAca -— nAham etat tava gotraM veda; he tAta! yad-gotras tvam asi |

2. kasmAn na vetsi? ity uktAha -— bahu-bhartR-gRhe paricaryA-jAtam atithy-abhyAgatAdi charanti ahaM parichAriNI paricharantIti, paricharaNa-shIlaivAham; paricharaNa-chittatayA gotrAdi-smaraNe mama mano nAbhUt |

3. yauvane ca tat-kAle tvAm alabhe labdhavaty-asmi |

4. tadaiva te pitoparataH; ato’nAthAhaM sAham etan na veda yad-gotras tvam asi |

5. jabAlA tu nAmAham asmi, satyakAmo nAma tvam asi | sa tvaM satyakAma evAhaM jAbAlo’smIty AcAryAya bruvIthAH; yad yAcAryeNa pRSTa ity abhiprAyaH || 2 ||

*****

1. When her son asked her about his father, Jabala answered, "I don’t know in which gotra you were born."

2. Her son then asked, "Why don’t you know?" She answered, “I used to be engaged in my husband’s house. Then I was so busily engaged in household work, serving guests and so on, that I was too absorbed in service to remember things like the gotra.

3. Then I had you when you were still young and your father died. So now I am a widow and I don’t know your gotra.

What word in Shankara-bhAShya indicates that her husband died? It is 'alabha'--loss as against labha--gain; that is, she gained her son, but lost her husband.--sd

4. My name is Jabala and you are Satyakama. So you can tell your teacher that you are Jabala Satyakama (i.e. Satyakama, son of Jabala) when he asks you.

*****

The Sri Vaishnava scholar Ranga Ramanuja Muni has written a commentary to this Upanishad called Prakashika. His comment on this verse goes as follows:

ahaM bhartR-gRhe’thity-abhyAgatAedibhyo bahu-paricaryA-jAtaM carantI gurv-Adi-paricaraNa-zIlA ca satI tad dhy AsaGgena gotrAnabhijJaiva yauvana-kAle tvAM labdhavatI gotraM na jAne | ato jabAlAyAH putraH satyakAma-nAmAham asmi | nAhaM gotraM vedeti guru-samIpe brUhIty uktavatIty arthaH ||

Which pretty much confirms Shankara, except that he makes Jabala even more pious--serving the guru also. No prostitution or hanky-panky there either.--post from Jagat

Source for Puri Maharaj's translation and Ranga Ramanuja Muni's bhAShya:
http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/topic_2166.html

*****

Thus, I don't see any reason to reject the traditional translations of Shankara and others and subscribe to the perverted outlook of some egotistic scholars--eastern or western. In fact, this study has taught me to be more careful and try to get the right mental frame while interpreting our sacred texts, and learn where to look for the right message.

To Dharmaputra everything and everyone was good; he was never a marmaputra and his dharma was transparent. To Duryodhana, every thought was a dur-yojana. To reiterate the wisdom, 'we see only what we want to see': of course times are such, but then the wise in all innocence, try to see the truth which is past all time.

atanu
30 March 2010, 06:40 AM
Is this it?

http://nirmukta.com/2010/03/14/subterfuge-how-brahmins-destroyed-the-bhagavata-revolution/
http://nirmukta.com/2010/03/25/hindu-revisionism-was-shankaracharya-deceptive-or-just-ignorant/


Has any one read these before?

vivendi
30 March 2010, 09:48 AM
Thanks Atanu. The author is a brahmin by birth but is throwing gas all around. This just goes to prove that a brahmin is not a brahmin by birth. This dingaling author writing against brahmins and against hindus shows the character of a chandala. Whoever taught him a little of bhagavat and gita should have rejected him as a student based on his true varna.

The author has made several technical mistakes which is a waste of time to correct them. If it was one or two mistakes possibly it would have been worth it.

The problem with these atheists is that they know somethings here and there about texts like bhagavat and gita to malign them, but do not know the true purport of the verses. They pick only those things which they like to criticize. Then they give an impression as though they know everything. The good thing about the author is even though he is a confirmed jackass, he is quite straight forward. He an out and out rationalist (still biased) and does not hide behind any other philosophy like judaism, bahaism, hedonism, history, science, or buddhism.

Nara
30 March 2010, 03:17 PM
... and you claim that you don't manipulate and extrapolate the texts to brew the meaning that is in your mind ?

Perhaps, you were alive in Gautama and Jabala's time to claim all this ...

You may also be knowing the names of men who slept with Jabala ?

And the greatest part of it is that even though Jabala was unable to know who fathered Satyakama but you know it for sure that it was a Brahmin

.... great ! You appear to have the finer details of Jabala's sexual behaviour and sexual encounters and their results !! That is really remarkable, sir !

OM


Dear devotee, you say all this about me and end with OM, nice touch :)

Do you know what Adi Shankara, who is god to you, thinks about this issue? Please refer to 1.3.37 of Shankara Bhasyam of Vedanta Sutra. When you are there also check out 1.3.38 for what he thinks of Vidura's varna.

Cheers!

isavasya
30 March 2010, 05:44 PM
Isavasya, you think I tilted the truth, but I think not, and that is fine. The very fact Gauthama asked for Satyakama’s gotra indicates to us the criterion to accept him as a pupil included birth in a Brahmin family. Japanese martial arts teacher asking for lineage does not negate the fact Gautama did as well. But to his credit, Gautama readily accepted Satyakama as his student.



namaskar Nara,



The fact of the matter is your whole assertion relies on the fact of gautama asking for satykama;s gotra, lets look at it in two ways.



1. Out of norm or sake of introduction, masters always inquire about their pupil's background at first, irrespective of it being good or tainted,



2. Let me appear a little blasphemous and suggest you non-brahmins too have gotra. yes jaat,gujjar,rajput,bania,dalit etc ect do have that, now some typical communist (mostly anti-hindu) will say it is todays phenomenon and gotra wasnt allowed for non-brahmins in old times, which i dont see as correct, gotra for non-brahmins becomes so important that even murder happens, i did presented a whole paper on caste thing in my final year, so I can say all these with 100 % confidence.so pratyaksha pramaan suggest us that gotra thing has been for all.



Again, you give me the answer mate, and I dont want answer from shankara bhashya or what puri maharaj has given the meaning of the story. vivekananda, radhakrishnan, aurobindo,ramkrishn math,iskon, arya samaj and all other who have taken this story as a great example and one knows well, what is the point in case here. In my last post I had told you about contradictions of your answer and again I will like to put one simple and practical logic to answer you and of course people whose floated ideas you have taken convenient to make others believe Hinduism is all about birth sytem.



Suppose mahatma gandhi was in place of satyakama, he will have also have anwswred the same truth, so again gautam would have taken him (a Bania).Giving such logic that only born brahmin can speak truth is insanity.Isnt it simple and logical enough for people like you to understand texts in terms of logical consistencies apart from textual meanings. The upanishad is so simple, Gautama, tells us souls with satya (purity) are brahmin ,irrespective of birth. so you still cant disprove this chapter and you are giving illoical logics to disprove this strory.


.


But sadly, we have only Dronocharyas in our midst in today's world, not many Gautamas. Whether Sanatana Darma is the best or not, I won't comment on at this point.




Dear nara, have you ever heard about these gautamas -:

Bassavana (Basaveshwara) -who took many satyakama's.
Maharshi dayanand saraswati -know abt him ?


ramkrishna - viveknanda

mahapandit chanakya -sudra chandragupt maurya…

Machhendranath -Gorakhnath (reverse case here)..etc etc, which i wont post.

You see what you want or perhaps dont see what you should. Sanatan dharm has the greatest past and so has hindustan, because of greatness of sanatan dharm values.There have always been many a number of gautamas in indian society that's why Sanatan dharm and India has a great past, that is why people like valmiki,ved vyasa,satyakama existed !!Let us all try to bring that in todays society instead of going for personal ego etc etc.


Sanatan dharm ki jay.

devotee
30 March 2010, 11:17 PM
Dear Nara,


you say all this about me

I have no malice or disrespect or any dislike towards you ... please rest assured. I am saying only on the basis of your post and the actual verses in Chandogya Upanishad. I have no desire to say anything against you or anyone but when the truth is being presented by you in a distorted manner, I think you should better be made aware of it.



Do you know what Adi Shankara, who is god to you, thinks about this issue? Please refer to 1.3.37 of Shankara Bhasyam of Vedanta Sutra. When you are there also check out 1.3.38 for what he thinks of Vidura's varna.


Yes, Shankara is very highly respectable for me. I have no issues if the word Sudra used by him in 1.3.37 and 1.3.38 refers to Varna by guna and karma. May be he used these words for a certain time and place and is no more valid today. I really can't say.

And I have already made it clear that I am not happy in this situation ... but my views are clear and it remains the same ... if it contradicts the thinking of Shankara ... so be it. I ask for his forgiveness for this.

OM

atanu
31 March 2010, 12:37 AM
Dear devotee, you say all this about me and end with OM, nice touch :)

Do you know what Adi Shankara, who is god to you, thinks about this issue? Please refer to 1.3.37 of Shankara Bhasyam of Vedanta Sutra. When you are there also check out 1.3.38 for what he thinks of Vidura's varna.

Cheers!

Namaste Shri Nara

Although you have stopped responding to my posts, i hold your dispassionate way of forwarding your arguments in regard.



Shankara
1.3.37. And on account of (Gautama) proceeding (to initiate Gâbâla) on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a Sûdra).

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Gautama, having ascertained Gâbâla not to be a Sûdra from his speaking the truth, proceeded to initiate and instruct him. 'None who is not a Brâhmana would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth' (Kh. Up. IV, 4, 5); which scriptural passage furnishes an inferential sign (of the Sûdras not being capable of initiation).



Ramanuja
37. And on account of the procedure, on the ascertainment of the non-being of that.

That a Sûdra is not qualified for knowledge of Brahman appears from that fact also that as soon as Gautama has convinced himself that Gâbâla, who wishes to become his pupil, is not a Sûdra, he proceeds to teach him the knowledge of Brahman.
-------------------------

Yet are we all missing something? Suppose, I want to join your faculty as Senior Professor. Will you induct me? Or will you test my suitablity? As per our scriptures, some may be more suitable and some may not be suitable at all, just as water is not suitable for lighting a fire.

This is the rough paraphrasing. But role of karma is not negated at all. I somehow find it very unbecoming of a man of your stature (and one who is a Vaisnava) to hold on to a view of Brahmin conspiracy etc.). As if Ishwara is powerless.

It has been told that Duryodhana and Yudhistira, both were Kshatriyas but how they differed? In same family two brothers may be entirely opposite. To categorise all population into four classes and then to generalise on the class as a whole is wrong -- even a kid should be able to understand.

Moreover, fire, water, air, earth are all opposed to each other (as if), but they need to exist by complementing each other. Sometime fire dries up water and at other times water extinguishes fire. Does anyone say that there is BLOT?

But in case of general human classification, we say so, because the sense of "I-Me-Mine" overpowers everyone. Our scriptures says that in Time, the three colours Red, White, and Black, representing Rajas, Sattva, and Tamas are fundamental properties of mind. Combining these basic properties gives rise to 4 basic varnas, as the excellent post of Yajvan explains. The basic varnas do definitely indicate certain proclivities in certain directions and Ishwara (as per scripture) controls the placement of jivas at suitable environments. So, it wrong to say that the spiritual varnas will have no effect in manifested world. But this varna is not fixed and it interacts with karma continously, though for a single life time varna is considered fixed, since the functions and duties of a body must be finished. As in the examples you and Devotee have shown, each case needs an independent evaluation. And even without proof of birth, one is inducted by the indications, as in the case of satyakAma. So, the actual indications are PRIMARY.

Further, Scripture does not teach that the four varnas have rights according to their varna. Scripture says: You have obligation according to placement in society, but no right to the fruits of action. Obviously we forget this and only demand rights.

Just as someone may infer injustice and blot with the natural differences of fire, water, and air -- I surmise that some infer blots in a theory of varna , primarliy due to ignorance. But that is not to say that injustice does not happen. Yet, Shri Shankara teaches that all wrongs begin with identification of subtle "i" (ego) that rises in body, with the body.

Not understanding the original sin/avidya leads everyone (including this) to see the mistake elsewhere.

That said, i remember that our scripture also talks of of Shiva-Rudra's role in destroying the pride of those in power, whether they be of any varna. Shiva himself exists in this world as caretaker in crematoriums -- as an outcaste. He vanquished the pride of Brahmins in Dandyakarnya. He vanquished the pride of Prajapati Daksha. Yet He saves the mankind by taking uopn Hinself the poison Halahala.

So our intention is not to condone wrongs but to oppose efforts to divide society, based on Caste. Actually, Shri Nara may be just doing that which he is apparently opposing. Kindly think of this aspect Shri Nara.

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

I think the whole thing boils down to such ego assertion as of water: "What is so special about agni? I can also burn." And ego assertion of young atanu: "What is so special about Prof. Nara? I can also be a professor."

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
31 March 2010, 07:05 AM
…..Although you have stopped responding to my posts, i hold your dispassionate way of forwarding your arguments in regard.

Dear atanu, it is not that the epithets do not bother me, they do, but I also realize retaliating in kind is a disservice to this forum. I suppose as an atheist I see the humanity in people, and the religious enthusiasts only see the criticism of their own religion, not whether the criticism has any merit.

I have tried my best to respond to all the comments, but I see that it is futile to keep on responding to mere assertions repeatedly presented as self-evident facts. I will respond to every reasonable argument presented with civility and seriousness.



…we all missing something? Suppose, I want to join your faculty as Senior Professor. Will you induct me? Or will you test my suitablity? I am now preparing a detailed post on why I think Varna is a blot and I will present my views on these questions in that post. But, quickly, for you to be hired as professor surely your qualifications will be checked. But that would not include your birth lineage.

Satyakama Jabala wanted to be a pupil. Any system that requires birth lineage as part of his suitability to be a student is a blot to the society that uses that system.

Peace…

Nara
31 March 2010, 07:12 AM
....I have no malice or disrespect or any dislike towards you ... please rest assured.

Dear devotee, I know you only from this forum and all I have is your words to go by, and they do belie the assurance you are giving me.

But, I do think you are a decent person as you come across as an open and honest person. I wish you the best, peace ...

saidevo
31 March 2010, 08:38 AM
namaste Nara.

You said in your post #110:

I am now preparing a detailed post on why I think Varna is a blot and I will present my views on these questions in that post. But, quickly, for you to be hired as professor surely your qualifications will be checked. But that would not include your birth lineage.

Satyakama Jabala wanted to be a pupil. Any system that requires birth lineage as part of his suitability to be a student is a blot to the society that uses that system.
*****

Is there not a difference between a worldly and spiritual course? Since as KRShNa ParamAtma said every soul has a set of guNa-karma at birth, which decides their varNa at birth although it might change later on, what is wrong in a guru asking about the gotra (and thereby varNa) to decide on the level of the student, to know which he has no other way? Since you and I are of the opinion that varNa is by birth, what was wrong in sage Gautama asking for the gotra of SatyukAma who sought to learn from him?

According to shrI Abinava VidyAtIrtha SvAmigaL of Shringeri MaTham, the three varNas comprising brAhmaNa, kShatriya and vaishya are required to have upanayanam and become dvija--twice-born. Although the ShUdra varNa is exempted from this compulsion, Hindu history of ancient and recent times has seen many from this varNa excel in spiritual advancement and become sages and thereby become atiAshramis--people beyond the varNa barrier. This only indicates that people from this varNa were also accommodated by their gurus, depending on their spiritual propensity, to AtmavidyA. IMO, sage Gautama could have made an exception in the case of SatyakAma, even if he did not know him to be a brAhmaNa by birth.

atanu
31 March 2010, 08:47 AM
Dear atanu, it is not that the epithets do not bother me, they do, ------.[/
----- but I see that it is futile to keep on responding to mere assertions repeatedly presented as self-evident facts. ----


Namaste shri nara

I agree. But the above statements remain mere assertions if the alleged mere assertions are not pointed out. Same with epithets.



But, quickly, for you to be hired as professor surely your qualifications will be checked. But that would not include your birth lineage.
Satyakama Jabala wanted to be a pupil. Any system that requires birth lineage as part of his suitability to be a student is a blot to the society that uses that system.
Peace…

Your such sweeping assertions are bound to invite anger and criticism.

Universities may use some criteria, which may be discriminative, like allowing students who can pay bribe or get political support etc. Whereas, Scriptures in this case disallow Vedic studies and sacrificial rites to Sudra, transparently. More so, since a Sudra today was likely Brahmin earlier and vice versa.And the reasoning is not discriminatory, as is clear from Manu Smriti:

Manu X, 126, 'In the Sûdra there is not any sin, and he is not fit for any ceremony.'

The burden of purification is not there at all for Sudra, since he cannot be defiled.. Such a pure Sudra, who has performed his own duties, can immediately get a release. Further Shankara explains in BS Bhashya 1.3.38:

1.3.38. And on account of the prohibition, in Smriti, of (the Sûdras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.

Shankara bhashya
The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, and their understanding and performing Vedic matters. ------

'--From those Sûdras, however, who, like Vidura and 'the religious hunter,' acquire knowledge in consequence of the after effects of former deeds, the fruit of their knowledge cannot be withheld, since knowledge in all cases brings about its fruit. Smriti, moreover, declares that all the four castes are qualified for acquiring the knowledge of the itihâsas and purânas; compare the passage, 'He is to teach the four castes' (Mahâbh.).--It remains, however, a settled point that they do not possess any such qualification with regard to the Veda.
---------------------

So, it is settled that Sudra is held pure but not eligible for sacrificial work and Vedic study. We do not fully understand the implications but to analyse these with a worldy mind is fraught with danger. On the other hand, there is no hindrance to acquiring Knowledge through itihAsa, purAna, etc., and Sudra is equally eligible for release from bondage on the first birth itself, without any purificatory rites.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
31 March 2010, 09:02 AM
Manu X, 126, 'In the Sûdra there is not any sin, and he is not fit for any ceremony.'


Kindly also check the view of Kanchi pontiff, who citing Veda Vyasa says: "Sudra Sadhuh''

I do not think that we understand scriptures fully. To assert again and again that the system is a Blot, can at best be an indication of ignorance of the fact that there may be more to know.

Om Namah Shivaya

Nara
31 March 2010, 09:10 AM
...what was wrong in sage Gautama asking for the gotra of SatyukAma who sought to learn from him?

Dear saidevo, Gautama was only following the established traditions and therefore I don't find fault with him. My problem is with the system that made him ask for gotra. What is presented in BG as Lord Sri Krishna's views is doctrine. Look at what this doctrine has wrought.



.... Although the ShUdra varNa is exempted from this compulsion, Hindu history of ancient and recent times has seen many from this varNa excel in spiritual advancement and become sages and thereby become atiAshramis--people beyond the varNa barrier. This only shows having birth in certain varna as a prerequisite for spiritual study is pointless.

Cheers!

vivendi
31 March 2010, 09:50 AM
I suppose as an atheist I see the humanity in people, and the religious enthusiasts only see the criticism of their own religion, not whether the criticism has any merit.

This is a strawman argument, glorifying oneself like 'I am a saint and you are ignorant' kind of thing. I suppose I can use the same argument and say that as a theologian, I suppose I see the humanity in people, and the radical atheists only see the futility of my love of humanity.

The atheists do not like to hear their ideas lack any merit. By nicely and indirectly propagating hostility to hindu culture, their gaps in logic which can fool the gullible, and elitist tendencies, the atheists cannot realize their silent dream of becoming the popes of the world.

atanu
31 March 2010, 10:40 AM
Dear saidevo, Gautama was only following the established traditions and therefore I don't find fault with him. My problem is with the system that made him ask for gotra. What is presented in BG as Lord Sri Krishna's views is doctrine. Look at what this doctrine has wrought.

This only shows having birth in certain varna as a prerequisite for spiritual study is pointless.
Cheers!

Kindly read posts 113 and 114. Your statement in blue is mere assumption and assertion, possibly borrowed idea from these:

http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/38B1.%20Who%20were%20the%20Shudras%20PART%20I.htm (http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/38B1.%20Who%20were%20the%20Shudras%20PART%20I.htm)

We may debate on these but it will take ages. Instead of finding the source of four classes in single Purusha and in Brahman (that is in you), great Ambedkar sows the seed of division. Is it essential to tarnish scripture without seeing the unity in it?

In respect of red above, kindly remember that Gautama, who determines from evidence that Jabala was a Brahamana, was/is part of the system, which you re blaming above.

Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
01 April 2010, 02:42 AM
Dear Nara,


I know you only from this forum and all I have is your words to go by, and they do belie the assurance you are giving me.


I can't force you to believe anything but I must clarify here that : Criticising your posts/views/"way of presentation of Hindu Dharma", doesn't mean criticising you as a person. I hope you acknowledge that.

OM

MahaHrada
01 April 2010, 06:13 AM
My problem is with the system that made him ask for gotra.

One should keep in mind that only the study and practise of the Vedas is restricted to the brahmins or dvijas and that vedanta, or shruti and smriti is only a tiny part of the whole of bharata dharma, there is no such varna restriction in the tantras and agamas which is the tradition that the majority of the indian population has been practising in the past and are practising today and which is followed in all the temples, during private pujas according to family traditions and other sources of sadhana.

If the brahmin community considers the Vedas as a tradition that can be solely practised by their community based on birth or ethnicity this was or is no societal problem as long as this rule does not interfere with, or is mistakenly applied to other spiritual or religious traditions notably the agamic or tantric tradition, which was always open to all classes of people and was generally practised as the popular religion throughout the known history of India even if it was laid down in writing much later than the vedas.

Nowadays only a tiny minorty of a few hundred people in India practise the vedic shrauta tradition which needs birth in a certain family as a qualification.

The Upanishads or Bhagavadgita were written at a time when the brahmins were still practising the shrauta tradition not the tantric or agamic or a mixture of both like it is nowadays.

When the varna requirement is also applied to the study and practise of agamic traditions this practice is not in accordance with what is laid down in the agamas and tantras.

If some smartas insist on varna requirements for their sadhana or upasana based on agamas and tantras in our time , it is because they kept the elitism of the shrauta tradition while mixing it with the agamic practises to a very large extent, almost abandoning the pure vedic karmas.

To summarise my point the restrictions concerning varna that are described in the Vedas are in the context of a tradition that is almost extinct nowadays and one that was always only practised by a limited number of people of a certain community based on ethnicity and family.

It seems advisable to begin the study of the vedic shrauta tradition in childhood otherwise it seems almost impossible to memorise the complex oral knowledge and behaviour codex,so even if there would be no qualification based on birth very few people from other backgrounds could sincerely hope to be able to become vedic brahmins.

Therefore what made sense in the original context makes only sense to a tiny community of traditional vedic families nowadays, and does not apply to Hinduism as such.

Nara
01 April 2010, 07:13 AM
...Criticising your posts/views/"way of presentation of Hindu Dharma", doesn't mean criticising you as a person. I hope you acknowledge that.

Dear devotee, please see your post #102 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=42197&postcount=102). At least to me it is nothing but ad hominem on steroids. I usually do not respond to such comments. If a person keeps repeating I stop even reading his/her posts. But, in your case, I thought you were just getting too emotional, but basically sincere.

A little empathy will serve all us very well.

peace ...

Nara
01 April 2010, 09:12 AM
....To summarise my point the restrictions concerning varna that are described in the Vedas are in the context of a tradition that is almost extinct nowadays and one that was always only practised by a limited number of people of a certain community based on ethnicity and family.

Yes MahaHrada, this is part of my argument, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

Cheers!

MahaHrada
01 April 2010, 10:22 AM
Yes MahaHrada, this is part of my argument, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

Cheers!

I think at the time the Upanishads were written the question of gotra did not have too much relevance since there was little desire or reason to practise and study the vedas outside of the specialised families, since every community was proud of its own religious or spiritual tradition and the resulting autonomy.

That varna was not a very important qualification can be gauged not only from the fact that it is only once mentioned in the vedas in the purusha sukta, but also by other hints. It was not in the shruti proper that discrimination occurs but much later on.

There is nothing wrong with specialization and autonomy it can be empowering and improve the whole society, we should probably restrict criticism to a lack of social mobility by rigidity of caste barriers, probably due to misuse of power and greed.

So if we look at varna or jati we always have to consider the historical dimension, and the locality also, and research in what period or under what circumstances jati specializations becomes unfavorable as a societal model.

Obviously there were times in the history of India when due to the jati system there was added flexibility of the society by allowing freedom and autonomy and diversity, even integrating, by the creation of new jatis, foreigners as useful and respected members of an all indian societal order while preserving the autonomy of other groups.

A jati based system is non supremacist non invasive and therefore less authoritarian or autocratic and more tolerant and less destructive of minorities than egalitarian societies which tend to produce central goverments, and therefore in the end need violent methods of mass control, adherence to a centralistic ideology and dictatorship.

We can watch how an egalitarian authoritarian muslim societal model (in bangladesh) has lead to the extinction or near extiction of the same tribal population that was protected and presevered by the empowering autonomy of the jati system in India which provided at least room for survival if not for a content life.

My point is i doubt that the real important question is whether an egalitarian, uniform and therefore authoritarian society, is better than one based on diversity, freedom of individual expression of diverse communities, and specialization, but it is rather more important to discuss how to eliminate the cause of discrimination, supremacism, misuse of power, greed and other defects.

Also when analysing societal models it is important to consider under what circumstances jati based specialisations are empowering and add to the flexibility and happiness or contentment of the members of the diverse communities and under what circumstances this model has disadvantages or is discriminating.

It is shurely possible to find ways to improve both the authoritarian egalitarian model and the more anarchic diversity based jati societal models that allows a greater freedom and autonomy.

atanu
01 April 2010, 12:02 PM
-----, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

Cheers!

Namaste Shri Nara

For Veda there is no earlier time and future time.

If you think that varNa asrama dharma was not valid and is not valid then why you should exert so much to prove that it is a blot?

Certainly we are all equal at the very fundamental level (which we know from scripture) but not at the level of particular desires, capabilities and functions, else our genetic make up would be same. Given some stimulus, all of us will react differently at some level or other. A plant has life, but plants are certainly different from men. One cannot force the same practises on plants and humans. The knowledge of four fold division of varNa is divine and primeval, and like the knowledge of saman (Lord equal in every one), this also is taught by the same Veda.

Elsewhere, since continuity of soul is not known (or believed), the varNa is not linked with birth. But in no society at any time the Classes: I, II, II, and IV have been absent. And the same Dharma shastra that teaches varNa duties, itself identifies the kali yuga as different from other yugas and states that liberality will prevail in this yuga. Yet the same shastra teaches that varNa dharma duties remain eternal -- whether one knows or not is a different matter.

If, based on analysis of conditions, i find that though born a Brahmin, i do not qualify, I am very satisfied with being a Sudra, since it frees me from a lot of responsibilities. I can just practise surrender and rest in peace. On the other hand, i cannot say that this is the universal feeling all around. So I will not say that the scripture is a blot and all should follow me.

Einstein's science is not relevant for vast population. That does not make the Relativity theory irrelevant and a blot. It is directly relevant for those who make use of it but I cannot say that tomorrow it will not be relevant for me. The teaching of dharma shastra is for householders and is one of the ten branches of Vedic Dharma. It is valid and relevant fully for those who are placed by birth to follow it. But it may not be directly relevant for a Christian. Yet, being part of a Revolving system, a few aspirants will always cycle through this path to attain the ultimate knowledge that Self is all this.

Om Namah Shivaya
,

TatTvamAsi
01 April 2010, 12:09 PM
Any system that requires birth lineage as part of his suitability to be a student is a blot to the society that uses that system.

Peace…

Nara,

That is only true of non-Vedic "studies"; as that is probing into the phenomenal world and it goes only so far. For Vedic study, it has always been that unless one is ready to receive the knowledge of Brahman, one should not be allowed to study the Vedas, for they will only turn around and ridicule it. And, that is what is happening today! All sorts of uninitiated mlecchas are reading the Vedas and pontificating on it as if they are an authority (a la Michael Witzel and other dopes).

I see that you agree with the fact that Varna is indeed based on birth but it also depends on guna and karma. The three are interlinked and cannot be made mutually exclusive. Plus, you have to look at this with a multi-life perspective. How can you do that if you claim to be a rationalist or scientist in the modern sense? They reject reincarnation simply because there is no physical proof.

So are you of the contention that anyone, whatever be their lineage, should be allowed to be inducted into Vedic study? I suppose that would be the liberal, modern outlook but unfortunately that is not what is best. It is like saying anyone can become a scientist without the proper education, preparation, and discipline. Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.

MahaHrada
01 April 2010, 12:19 PM
Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.

Valmiki was a highway robber and Narada (who was also not a Brahmin but nonetheless a Rishi) his Guru. In one story i remember Narada was disciple of a fisherman and son of a servant woman. Not that simple apparently. Except when Brahmins where engaged in robbing people at that time and worked as part time fisherman, which is not really a convincing explanation. Satyavati mother of veda vyasa was a fisher woman also. So Veda Vyasa was born from a mixing of caste! (and probably Narada also because he was educated in a brahmin household while being son of a maidservant)

TatTvamAsi
01 April 2010, 12:31 PM
Valmiki was a highway robber and Narada (who was also not a Brahmin but a Rishi) his Guru. Not that simple apparently. Except when Brahmins where engaged in robbing people at that time, which is not really a convincing explanation

Was Valmiki born a highway robber? His guna/karma in the early part of his lifetime led to his unfortunate occupation. Yet, his spiritual evolution was advanced enough that under the tutelage of his Guru, he was able to break all barriers.

And, "Brahmins were engaged robbing people"? Where on earth did you get that? Finally, Valmiki, like Veda Vyasa, was an exception. It wasn't the norm for highway robbers to become sages! Nice try, but it is quite that simple! ;)

MahaHrada
01 April 2010, 12:51 PM
Was Valmiki born a highway robber? His guna/karma in the early part of his lifetime led to his unfortunate occupation. Yet, his spiritual evolution was advanced enough that under the tutelage of his Guru, he was able to break all barriers.

And, "Brahmins were engaged robbing people"? Where on earth did you get that? Finally, Valmiki, like Veda Vyasa, was an exception. It wasn't the norm for highway robbers to become sages! Nice try, but it is quite that simple! ;)

Now you said that only Brahmins are evolved enough to be Rishis so according to you there is no other option than double occupation by a part time "robber brahmin" to explain valmikis fate :) My point is not that it is or was the norm, but that there has been no rigid caste barrier all the time and there is always some amount of individual mobility in the jati system but it is more rarely desired or even needed than most people would think. It is to decide how much mobility in what kind of circumstances is of advantage for a society that is based on respect for diversity rather than enforcement of uniformity. Generally all communities are proud of their autonomy and do not necessarily accept that there is a fixed hierachy which focusses on the brahmins. So there is a great amount of flexibilityand mobility also in the interelation between jatis, no cemented rigid hierachical structure with the brahmin on top. Power was mostly wielded by kshatriyas and brahmans where often subservient. In kerala the local communities strived for a long time entirely without a brahmin population, they arrived at a later date, nonetheless it was a jati based societal model.
Only in the earliest and simplest stage of the spiritual path in bharata dharma, that of the vedas and vedanta, birth in a brahmin household is needed as a qualification. In the higher darshanas laid down in the agamas and tantras, that contain and go beyond vedanta, there are other higher qualifications needed, since the agamas and tantras can be practised regardless of varna or jati and gender, few people need or desire birth as a male in a brahmin family to be competent to study and practise shrauta. There existed in the past agamic hindu kingdoms stretching into Cambodia or Indonesia (today Bali is still Hindu), that were religiously entireley managed by the local population in other words by Mlecchas, so there isn´t any need to be born in india to be qualified for the higher teachings, much less to be a brahmin.

Nara
01 April 2010, 02:22 PM
.... It is like saying anyone can become a scientist without the proper education, preparation, and discipline. Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.

Greetings!

It is not that simple as you say. The field of science is open to anyone. Right gotra is never a prerequisite.

Cheers!

vivendi
01 April 2010, 06:34 PM
Greetings!

It is not that simple as you say. The field of science is open to anyone. Right gotra is never a prerequisite.

Cheers!
Dear brother Nara, I am a 10th class dropout. Can I write a paper on big bang theory and claim discrimination if they reject my personal opinion on big bang? There is something called 'qualification' in science without which any tom dick or harry cannot claim to be a scientist. In a conference of scientists on global warming, only authorised people are allowed to enter. I cannot cry foul if they ban me from entering. If everyone are equal then even quaks and street ph.ds should be allowed to step on the real scientists.

Similarly, the episode of Gautama is proof that anyone with qualification can become a student.

devotee
01 April 2010, 10:08 PM
Dear Nara,


please see your post #102 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=42197&postcount=102). At least to me it is nothing but ad hominem on steroids. I usually do not respond to such comments. If a person keeps repeating I stop even reading his/her posts. But, in your case, I thought you were just getting too emotional, but basically sincere.


Ad hominem and that too on steroids ?? This is an example of taking things personally when it is not really so.

My post draws all conclusions from your post alone. It is simply a derivative of your own post. Please see your post below where you claimed all this :



The reason for inquiring about gotra is to ascertain whether Satyakama was born into a varna eligible for Vedic study. Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study. Given that Gautama asked about his Gotra shows that the truth-telling nature of brahamanas that he saw in the boy is traced to Satyakama's unknown Gotra.

In your above analysis, you have distorted the meaning that the Upanishad tries to convey. Do you think that all Brahmins by birth speak only truth and never tell a lie ? Or do you think that Gautama Rishi was so much a dumb-headed sage who believed so ? Being born to a certain Kula and parents does give one a benefit of getting the right samskaras but it is not always so. Now in the above case, the mother is Sudra so the child can never be a born Brahmin ... that is settled by the Laws of Manu. So, considering or guessing that the child could be a born brahmin is simply ridiculous. In spite of this fact, Gautama admits him based on his qualities ... declaring him a Brahmin. What does that show ? It simply shows that real Brahmin is one who has the qualities of a Brahamin ... this is what Gautama believed in .... otherwise by no logic the child of a Sudra woman can be considered a born Brahmin.

Please see the analysis made above which can be the only explanation of why Gautama accepted the child based on his guna alone. But you chose to ignore all this & claimed, "Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study.". So, are you not trying to read the mind of a Gautama a little too much with not so good intentions ?

So, when I said in post 102, "Congrats for being able to read the mind of Gautama !" .... is it really an example of ad hominem ?

Again you said for Jabala and about the social behaviour of people and maidservants of that time :


This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed.

Can this conclusion be drawn from what Jabala said --- That "she was working in a rich man's house and part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed " ?? Where did you get all this ? Jabala simply said that she served many people in her youth and that is when Satyakama was born and she didn't remember who his father was ... that is all ! Based on this statement how are you drawing conclusions on social and sexual behaviour of all rich men with their maidservants ... and sexual behaviour of all maidservants of that time ??

So, what is wrong when I remarked in my post 102 that "Perhaps, you were alive in Gautama and Jabala's time to claim all this ... as it is no where in the scripture !"

And the worst of all, you claimed this too :


At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.

Where did you get all this ? How are you able to claim the above which is not only baseless, imaginary but also a perverted remarks ?

So, when I commented on the above and on the earlier quoted your own claims that :

"You may also be knowing the names of men who slept with Jabala ? And the greatest part of it is that even though Jabala was unable to know who fathered Satyakama but you know it for sure that it was a Brahmin .... great ! You appear to have the finer details of Jabala's sexual behaviour and sexual encounters and their results !! That is really remarkable, sir !"

How is it more than what you yourself claimed ?

I am sorry if you felt hurt .... but I also felt hurt when you tried to present the distorted and perverted meaning from our revered scriptures. You want me to feel guilty over my remarks which are nothing but but a derivative of your own posts ... but on the other hand, are you ready to accept that you should not have tried to present a distorted meaning of our scriptures and that you should feel guilty for that act ??

OM

upsydownyupsy mv ss
02 April 2010, 07:25 AM
I had replied the following in another thread, I would like to repeat it here.



hmm... a serious discussion. My opinion is: "The varna system is an outstanding discovery of the early hindus, but the later hindus of the upper misunderstood the varna system and converted it into caste system for their advantage. Varna system is awesome. But jaati system is naive. Even Mahathma Gandhi 'appreciated' the varna system and not the 'caste' system. Varna system is vedic and flawless and from the scriptures, but caste system is all 'made-up' " And yes! There certainly is a BIG DIFFERENCE between the varna and the caste system. Most people consider them to be the same, hence they argue it to be a blot. And satay, neither do I see this as a personal attack on Nara.
Dear sir, Nara. Please search the forums for 'Varna system misunderstanding' and please go through the thread. Varna means basically colour. Here, colour means the colour of the soul in the present janma.
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING UPSYDOWNYUPSY MV SS? ARE YOU NAIVE? HOW CAN THE SOUL HAVE COLOUR???

NO. I'm not naive. Here colour refers to the nature. That is,
1.) Is he a noble warrior and/or a leader who protects people and justice, with his physical strength and brains even if it means violence? (Like police, military, paramilitary, scientists who work on missiles and bombs) Then he is a Kshatriya varna and not to be mixed with Kshatriya caste.
2.) Is he a noble person, who is patient, kind to others and does seva of the society and people in both big and little terms and is humble? Then he is Shudra.
3.) Is he a noble person who takes care of the society and works hard and strives for the best and who is as intelligent as a brahmin and is ready to be a Shudra at any time and attains wealth of all terms through righteousness? Then he is a Vaishya. (FARMERS, business men, the term used as 'aam admi' in india)
4.) Is he a noble person who excells in spirituality or sciences or arts or in teaching or advising the rulers or thinking or inventing or discovering? Then he is a brahmin by varna and not by caste.
Varna system is by deeds and thoughts.
The above is varna system. In varna system, all people are considered equal as all are equally important, just as even tissue or organ of a plant or animal is important, but are different in structure and function. If varna system is to be wrong (which is not), then the classification of species in biology is wrong and classification of anatomy of animals and plants is wrong. Even ants follow the varna system, also termites, also lions, also monkeys and apes, also bees. Is varna system wrong, if so, nature is wrong, which is Impossible as nature is a part of god.

Coming to the caste system, it says one who is born to a brahmin family is a brahmin, one born to a kshatriya family is a kshatriya and so on. If you still dont get the difference, again read the whole thing.

Dear sir nara and others, the scriptures are never wrong, only misunderstood

paritraana
02 May 2010, 10:37 PM
I would request you to read this commentary to understand the real meaning of bhagavat Gita. The concept of varna sankara will be properly understood if u keep reading this. I will be updating this daily. Request you to read from the first chapter.

http://paritrana.blog.co.in/category/religion/hinduism/bhagavat-gita-as-i-understand/

rainycity
10 May 2010, 08:08 AM
one problem with varna, is where does this leave non-indians and non-hindus? they aren't born into any caste, so they are rendered subhuman ("mlechha")?

devotee
10 May 2010, 09:50 AM
one problem with varna, is where does this leave non-indians and non-hindus? they aren't born into any caste, so they are rendered subhuman ("mlechha")?

First of all, Mlechha doesn't mean Sub-human. It means "dirty".

Second, the Varna System applies to entire mankind unlike caste system which applies only to Indians. On this forum, I would grade Yajvan ji and EM as Brahmins (though they are non-Indian Hindus).

Caste system came into being independent of Varna system. It is strongly related with one's occupation & not necessarily related with one's guna and karma. If you read the history of caste system and varna which were ascribed to those castes ... there were many non-indians who were accepted as Kshatriyas. Many defeated Kshatriyas kings who were defeated in wars and lost their power and wealth took other occupations and that caste lost its Kshatria status. So, historically, the varna attached to a caste has kept on changing.

OM

smaranam
10 May 2010, 10:13 AM
one problem with varna, is where does this leave non-indians and non-hindus? they aren't born into any caste, so they are rendered subhuman ("mlechha")?

Namaste,

I was going to reply to this, and came in to find that DevoteeJi has explained beautifully as always.

Please allow me to add something - from a slightly different angle

If our purpose is Love of God, it does not matter what varNa, man or woman, lineage, country etc.

Its only when we act on our free will, misuse it and let ego take over that we are troubling the paramAtmA in the heart.

Sanatan Dharma has no question of belonging to some group/varNa or not in the absolute sense, as the moment we want to belong , its about bodily attachment.

A real Guru always takes away all attachments, statuses . This is to all disciples, irrespective of nationality or lineage. This is not to be mixed with the varNa of the disciple, that determines what rituals/mantras the Guru initiates them into.

A true student of VedAnta, or VaishNav, Shaiva, Shakta or any school, is asked to leave all designations behind, and start on a clean slate. Some sincere students of Sanatan Dharma brought up in western lands and cultures in this birth, have done this really well for their Guru.

VaishNavas think themselves lower than the lowest, lower than a blade of grass. Not a blade of grass can move without the Lord's Will. (Kena Upanishad). So 'mleccha' is nothing in comparison.

Also, there are certain things in Dharma ShAstra in the arena of lifestyle , ritualistically speaking, which are/should be bypassed/left alone or upto the Guru, for aspirants of simple pure bhakti. If someone asks "why can't I do this ritual" it is ignorance.


Its very simple :

ONE: A person who has been receiving a specific spiritual nurturing for years or generations will be more accustomed to it, than someone new to the teachings. There will be more conditioning to overcome.

TWO: Just because we are born into and grow up around sanatan dharma , does not necessarily make us more spiritually advanced , although there is a high chance given all the past life saMskAr, opportunity and exposure, early training, and teaching , provided it was used correctly.

BG 6.40: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Son of Pṛthā, a transcendentalist engaged in auspicious activities does not meet with destruction either in this world or in the spiritual world; one who does good, My friend, is never overcome by evil.

BG 6.41: The unsuccessful yogī, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people, or into a family of rich aristocracy.

BG 6.42: Or [if unsuccessful after long practice of yoga] he takes his birth in a family of transcendentalists who are surely great in wisdom. Certainly, such a birth is rare in this world.


When the ego is still around, we are not entitled to call ourselves XYZ from spiritual POV.
When ego leaves, we volunteer to not call ourselves XYZ, or better, do so involuntarily.

Someone said:
Before enlightenment, cut wood
After enlightenment, cut wood.


The Lord Almighty , is so full of LOVE, He comes crawling , toddling, singing , dancing , embracing any embodiment of Love.

Om Namo Bhagavate VAsudevAya

anupj
10 May 2010, 02:03 PM
First of all, Mlechha doesn't mean Sub-human. It means "dirty".

Second, the Varna System applies to entire mankind unlike caste system which applies only to Indians. On this forum, I would grade Yajvan ji and EM as Brahmins (though they are non-Indian Hindus).

Caste system came into being independent of Varna system. It is strongly related with one's occupation & not necessarily related with one's guna and karma. If you read the history of caste system and varna which were ascribed to those castes ... there were many non-indians who were accepted as Kshatriyas. Many defeated Kshatriyas kings who were defeated in wars and lost their power and wealth took other occupations and that caste lost its Kshatria status. So, historically, the varna attached to a caste has kept on changing.

OM
+1 for the post and especially the bold part

yajvan
10 May 2010, 03:33 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

From the chāndogya upaniṣad (chapter 4.4)

satyakāma approached his mother jabālā and said , I wish to live a life of a brahmacarya at a guru's abode ( kula); please tell me which lineage I am from ( gotro nv aham asmītī )
Mother ( jabālā ) said in short ' I do not know'. Announce yourself to the guru as satyakāma jabālā.

Satyakāma approached the guru (gautama) and asked to be taken in as brahmacārin. Gautama as expected asks 'tell me which from which gotra you come' . Satyakāma responds without hesitation and says , 'I do not know' and he tells the story given to him from his mother.
Gautama responds as says ' none other than a brāhmaṇa can say so ( or say what you have said). You did not deviate from the truth. Bring the sacrificial fuel And I shall initiate you. '

There is no doubt that convention says, brāhmaṇa-s alone have the right to learn the ved. Yet it is this guru gautama , son of haridrumata, which recognizes something more (perhaps). He is saying with his actions it is not by birth alone that one may learn the ved, but by ones genuine yearning and intent ( fitness) for knowing brahman that can make one a rightful student of vedānta.

praṇām

Ganeshprasad
10 May 2010, 04:23 PM
Pranam Devotee ji and all



Second, the Varna System applies to entire mankind unlike caste system which applies only to Indians. On this forum, I would grade Yajvan ji and EM as Brahmins (though they are non-Indian Hindus).





Second, the Varna System applies to entire mankind unlike caste system which applies only to Indians.

Varna as ordained by the lord himself off course applies to entire creation but it is another thing if all the creation abides by it. We have through out the history of Bhartvarsa people belonging to or for that matter outside off the system, like chandals malechasa, yavanas and so forth. Caste is an alien word introduced by malechas, for want of a better word jati which is interchangeable with varna which is what concerned Arjun.



On this forum, I would grade Yajvan ji and EM as Brahmins (though they are non-Indian Hindus).

I find this an extraordinary statement to make, and I mean no insult to you devotee ji nor to yajvan ji or em ji, from what I read and what they write, you all come across as very noble people, but I only see this as a small criteria to judge anyone, we as a human can not really know what ones inner desires and intents are, what to speak of a stranger behind a keyboard and therefore impossible for a human without ambiguity to make that judgment.

 


Caste system came into being independent of Varna system. It is strongly related with one's occupation & not necessarily related with one's guna and karma. If you read the history of caste system and varna which were ascribed to those castes ... there were many non-indians who were accepted as Kshatriyas. Many defeated Kshatriyas kings who were defeated in wars and lost their power and wealth took other occupations and that caste lost its Kshatria status. So, historically, the varna attached to a caste has kept on changing.

If by caste you mean jati then I have to disagree because jati and varna are interchangeable and related.

I do not know what historical facts you mean but it flies in the face of what Lord Krishna says, Change of varna Lord Krishna advise against it.

It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.
TEXT 47
sreyan sva-dharmo vigunah
para-dharmat svanusthitat
svabhava-niyatam karma
kurvan napnoti kilbisam

Jai Shree Krishna

Ekanta
10 May 2010, 05:55 PM
I'd like to post this as an alternative look as some has touched upon it. Quotes by Sathya Sai Baba:

Guna/karma & Varna
In a general way, predominantly Thamasic natures are grouped as Sudras. But among them, have we not many who are of pure Sathwic quality? Among those who are grouped as Brahmins, the pure Sathwic type, have we not many who are predominantly Thamasic? Therefore, the Vedic Religion of Bharath has clearly laid down that appearance alone, or birth in a family alone cannot decide caste. It has to be determined on the basis of character and occupation. (SSB, Sathya Sai Vahini)

4 Varnas found everywhere
People who discard the precious wisdom of the past are doomed to disaster. That is why, when people started decrying and disregarding the Vedas and Sastras, they started to decline in morality and strength, courage and confidence. One argument used to find fault with the Vedas by these conceited critics is that the Varna (caste) system is not found in advanced countries of the West, as if there too we have no religious leaders, social guardians, traders and workers and farmers. Inevitably, human society will get itself divided into these four sections. (sss04-45)

The Varna system
Of course, it is a fact that the system has veered from the proper path and taken to moving in wrong directions. This has been noted by many great men. But that cannot be sufficient reason to throw it overboard. For the reason that the leg is doing the work of the hand, and that the head is performing the function of the feet, it is not advisable to cut off hands and feet. Attempts have to be made to set things right, rather than destroying the very system itself. (SSB, Gita Vahini)

Sva
We must understand the inner meaning of this word Sva. The word Sva relates to Atma. In all aspects of Veda, this should be the correct interpretation. (ss1974-07)

Sva-Dharma
Dharma as an attribute of the Divine comprehends every kind of Dharma. Of these, two are important.
• Sva-Dharma refers to Atma-Dharma. Man's duty is to observe this spiritual code of conduct. In daily practice, when acts are motivated by the basic Principle of the reality of the Atma, every act becomes stamped with the seal of Dharma.
• Para Dharma relates to the body. When acts are motivated by convenience and selfish interest, the Dharma becomes pseudo Dharma. Dharma expresses itself in a variety of forms, like Manu-dharma, Varna-dharma, Grihastha-dharma etc. But these are subsidiary practical details, not the Fundamental Norm. In observing this mundane code of conduct man is haunted by fears and doubts of various kinds. In adhering to Sva-Dharma (the Spiritual code) there is no room for any such fears. Therefore, man should follow Atma Dharma. (sss22-37) / (Dharma Vahini)

Sai Ram!

Eastern Mind
10 May 2010, 06:06 PM
I would request you to read this commentary to understand the real meaning of bhagavat Gita. The concept of varna sankara will be properly understood if u keep reading this.

There are some 14 common, and many more translations and commentaries, each claiming to show the real meaning. How is yours different from all the rest?

Aum Namasivaya

devotee
10 May 2010, 10:31 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,



I find this an extraordinary statement to make, and I mean no insult to you devotee ji nor to yajvan ji or em ji, from what I read and what they write, you all come across as very noble people, but I only see this as a small criteria to judge anyone, we as a human can not really know what ones inner desires and intents are, what to speak of a stranger behind a keyboard and therefore impossible for a human without ambiguity to make that judgment.

I agree we can't judge a person on the basis of his posts on this forum alone. So, Yajvan ji or EM may not be the actual person in flesh & blood but whatever their posts reflects here. 


If by caste you mean jati then I have to disagree because jati and varna are interchangeable and related.

I respect your views. We may agree to disagree respectfully.


I do not know what historical facts you mean

Whatever I have written is based on authentic historical facts. Many foreign invader tribes who settled in India were assimilated within Hinduism as Kshatriyas. Similarly, there many Kshatriya castes who having lost their wealth and glory in wars had to take up lower category occupations in society to survive & their castes lost their Kshatriya status. In fact, the history tells us that the Kshatriya Kings and the Sudra Kings even had matrimonial relations due to political compulsions & that blurred the varnas attributed to quite a number of castes.


it flies in the face of what Lord Krishna says, Change of varna Lord Krishna advise against it.

Please read the verse again. He nowhere says that change of varna is prohibited. He tells us to do our sva-dharma which is decided by our guna and karma.

BTW, I do respect your views and here we may again agree to disagree.


It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.
TEXT 47
sreyan sva-dharmo vigunah
para-dharmat svanusthitat
svabhava-niyatam karma
kurvan napnoti kilbisam

Please see the terms used in the above verse :

Sva-dharma = One's own dharma
Svabhava-niyatam karma = Karma which are decided on the basis of one's svabhava (guna)

The use of "Svabhava-niyatam karma" makes it fully clear that the karma must be based on one's born gunas. And you would agree that gunas are not dependent on one's birth in a certain caste.

Dear Ganeshprasad ji, we have discussed this issue quite a few times. I respect your views but I differ with you on the interpretation of these verses.

Regards,

OM

rainycity
11 May 2010, 06:09 AM
First of all, Mlechha doesn't mean Sub-human. It means "dirty".

I know it doesn't mean sub-human, I thought it meant foreign. "Dirty" isn't a nice way to refer to non-indians either.

isavasya
11 May 2010, 10:07 AM
I know it doesn't mean sub-human, I thought it meant foreign. "Dirty" isn't a nice way to refer to non-indians either.

Take it easy man, No body calls non-indians as mlecchas ,except few people. Mleccha is a sanskrit term and you got to understand it's reference. In earlier times, civilization was mainly developed in aryvartha, and people who lived outside were mostly barbarians (who often attacked India). Then it became common to refer to those as melechas, as most of land surrounding India was uncivilized. Now its not the same case. Also 99% hindus dont even know there is any word called mellecha. It's a internet term mostly, I never read it once in my school or college textbook, nor even from my teachers, friend, parents etc. The common word used for non-indians is 'videshi' (one who belongs to differnt country). So I request you not to have fake understanding that non-indians are referred as mlecchas by Indians. They are not.




Caste system came into being independent of Varna system. It is strongly related with one's occupation & not necessarily related with one's guna and karma. If you read the history of caste system and varna which were ascribed to those castes ... there were many non-indians who were accepted as Kshatriyas.


Namste Devotee ji & yajvan ji,

Apart from story of satyakama, we have innumerable story in which people with good learning and wisdom got recognized as kshatriye, brahmana, irrespective of their birth.

Aitareya mahidasa was a child of a potter women and was not getting accepted by brahmanas, but her mother prayed to earth godess and then mahidasa became renowned for immense wisdom and even went on to write aitreya brahmana, aranyaka and upanishad.


Kavash-ailush was sudra and in his young days he was a person of low character, but later he studied and went on to become a vedic seer, and few verses of veda samhita are attributed to him.



 Nabhag, son of King Nedishtha became Vaishya. Many of his sons again became Kshatriya. Dhrist was son of Nabhag (Vaishya) but became Brahmin and his son became Kshatriya  You can see this story in 4th book of Vishnu puranam.

Apart from these none of people like ved vyasa, valmiki, satyakama Matanga , vishwamitra etc were brahmins, but we can see almost 99% scriptures are attributed to them. These people raised themselves from level of the sudra, and then only wrote or complied the scriptures because if these scriptures were written by sudra, they would contain elements of tamso guna and will not be revered by scholars. Also in our daily life we see so many people from non-kshatriye castes who are more like a ksahtriye than many 'born kshatriyes'. The same goes for vaishya, narayan murthy is a brahmin, but what a good eterpreneur he has become. One should not close eyes to real world and dwell only according to his interpretations of scriptures. Also devotee ji mentioned about some greek rulers getting recognition as kshatriye, well mahapandit chanakya installed a sudra chandragupta as ruler !! Did he do adharm ? He did a great thing by putting the best person as a ruler. Chandragupta was the one who combined all india for the first time.




It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly.





Namaste ganesh prasad ji,

Sir One thing I cant understand, Why you always consider those people who say 'varna comes from guna/sanskaar' as being wrong and incorrect. I can respect your view whn you say one should stick to work of his own varna , but then I dont necessarily have to believe in it. May be understanding and interpretation are different for us. See hindu samaj is diverse and not in control by any central authority. There are sampradaya's like school of kashmiri shaivism as propagated by achrya abhinavgupta, this sampradaya has no restriction of caste or birth. Similarly schools like veerashaivism or nath sampradaya. Also there were teachers like chaitanya mahaprabhu, who didnt gave much head to birth based varna system. Even in modern times, people like vivekananda, maharshi daynanda have not associated varna with some one's birth. The only thing I will like to ask you, why you cant respect the views of these hindus and their followers and necessarily think all of them have misunderstood the dharm. I am not saying you also share my belief, what I am saying is let us agree to disagree respectfully. Both you and me can be right in our respective views.


Now logically speaking you say one should stick to the duties of varna he was born in. Fine, I am sudra and want to represent myself in Indian army. Now according to you only a kshatriye should be part of Indian army. Isnt it better for kshatriye who has no guna of a ksahtriye to engage in other occupations than stick to duties of his varna ? See the society today, most of 'born' kshatriye, brahmana are not doing what is duty of their varna, read manu smriti and other shastras to know the duty of people of various varnas. Dont we see in our daily life, there are good and bad people in every caste, also people with different qualities in different caste. A kshatriye like a bahubali criminal who exploits comman man cant be called kshatriye, on the contrary a person who defends poor people should be believed a ksatriye irrespective of his brth. Brahmin is one thing and brahmin bandhu is another thing. A person born to brahmin but who engages in other occupations are called brahman bandhu, notice that now if a child who is born in family of brahmin bandhu can not even be called brahman bandhu, he simply loses his varna. I find philosophy of pre-defined varna and occupation similar to amderkite non-sense called reservation.

Also by correct teachings and sanskaar, any body can become a great saint or a warrior. A kshatriye like jaichand was blot for dharma and bharat varsha, but a warrior like birsa munda became havoc for British rulers.


namah shivvay.

yajvan
11 May 2010, 07:38 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

namasté




mleccha म्लेच्छ in its masculine gender is considered a foreigner ; some use the word as it's is defined as a barbarian or, non-Aryan.
This notion of 'dirty' may come from another definition as a man of an outcast race.

Now there is another definition offered for this mleccha , and that is a person who lives by agriculture or by making weapons.

One last definiton that is really different - as a noun this word is another name for copper or vermilion. I am now looking to
the roots of this word to see how copper comes to be.

praṇām

yajvan
11 May 2010, 09:07 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

namasté ganeshprasad,



It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it
I will assume this quote is from Chapter 3 , 35th verse of the Bhāgavad gītā. If I am mistaken , please correct me. I am having difficulty converting dharma to occupation.
Kṛṣṇa ( some prefer Kṛṣṇ ) says because one can perform it, one's own dharma (though) of lesser merit, is better then dharma of another.
I see dharma defined as :

that which is established or firm , steadfast decree , statute , ordinance , law
according to right or rule , rightly , justly , according to the nature of anything
nature , character , peculiar condition or essential quality , property , mark This most essential word is rooted in dhṛ - to uphold, carry , maintain , preserve.

I see occupation as what one would do to earn a living, income. I see dharma as one's self that is there 7 x 24 x 365, not just at work but the expansion of one's self to SELF. Occupation may be a component of dharma, but is not one's occupation.

My teacher has given the knowledge that this dharma is different at different stages of one's progress ( some like to use the word evolution) or growth. So for where one is, doing one's dharma for that level is correct even if it looks like or appears 'of lesser merit'.

Trying to follow the dharma of another causes stress and strain. The dharma of the Self is that of the eternal and of Being , yet the dharma within the relative field of life is that of the 3 guna-s and having them support your actions as much as possible. Hence the alignment to the dharma of one's evolution at the time.

I am happy to hear your opinions on this matter. If I have mis-understood your application of 'occupation' on this matter please let me know.

praṇām

Darji
12 May 2010, 02:28 AM
I want to be just like Yajvan when I grow up :)

Ganeshprasad
12 May 2010, 03:50 AM
Pranam Devotee ji

Yes we may agree to disagree on this, i would not have responded to your post but for one statement.

Pranam isavasya ji

No i am not against Guna Karma, just that who is the authority that would decide that, who would be a perfect judge that knows the inner desires of a jiva? and if birth is just an accident and has nothing to do with Guna Karma then i am afraid i am wasting my time here.
Birth affords the only measurable prerequisite for determining how a child should be trained.

Pranam Yajvan ji



I will assume this quote is from Chapter 3 , 35th verse of the Bhāgavad gītā. If I am mistaken , please correct me. I am having difficulty converting dharma to occupation.

Perhaps you missed the verse i quoted, the above verse is repeated more or less in chapter 18 verse 47, which is what i had quoted, this verse follows from the duties described in previous verses, so the connection at least for me is not hard to make.

Jai Shree Krishna

Darji
12 May 2010, 04:11 AM
I find it quite funny, as anti-colonial as most Indians are they still hold on for dear life to the tenants of caste as perceived by their once colonial masters based upon a biased interpretation of the Laws of Manu to suit the ideals of Georgian and Victorian social climate and then try and justify it with actual scripture. Why?



*edit* this is at least a fairly common belief in the west that the caste system wasn't as rigid until the perversion of it by the East India Company and Later the British Empire.

MahaHrada
12 May 2010, 06:30 AM
that the caste system wasn't as rigid until the perversion of it by the East India Company and Later the British Empire.

Who says that it is rigid today, except biased and arrogant westerners or communists/maoists/jihadis who cannot look beyond the rim of their teacup?
The British and the Muslim occupation had some impact on the indian society, by purposeful trying to divide Hindu society into brahmins and "outcastes",and favouring smriti, and persecuting agamas and tantras and what they considered less civilised communities, but the impact on society as a whole is not as strong as you may think.

Class society in the west is much more rigid and less adaptive and way more cruel and unforgiving than the Varna or jati system. Everybody who is not worldly succesful or for some reason cannot compete is punished and rejected by the egalitarian society.

Jati and varna allows and empowers individual freedom of choice and free expression and respect for many diverse communitys and extends support and help to the weaker individual that cannot compete as well with others. In the western and muslim egalitarian societies and religions greatest importance and honour is granted only to people that are worldly successfull and have gained money or power and influence over others and everyone is judged only by standards that are measuring whether his outward appearance is expensive or how much merit is gained by submission to some common standards of success, youth, beauty and ability to win in competing with others in diverse ways, forcing people to become "winners" by all means, avoiding to be "Loosers" leading to an emotional disfunctional majority that are mentally unstable and stressed suffering from all kind of psycholgical defects, (Majority of americans are under constant medication like prozac etc. nowadays)

Indian society not only honours success in competition but also honours virtuous or spiritual conduct and life style, ones attitude and manners, age, birth, and diverse non competitive factors, it shows respect to a diversity of expression of different communities or castes, which in their turn extend help and support and provide a religious and social identity and self esteem to all those that belong to a tradition, varna, jati or family regardless whether they can compete in worldly matters as well as others or not.

In Indian society a teacher or mother and father or a spiritual person of good conduct are honoured not only when they are materially successful and can afford fancy expensive clothes, big houses, cars and electronic gadgets, or are in other ways sucessful and dominant but because of what they are. What they are is also defined by the conduct or svadharma of the Jati or Varna and the family they belong to. This societal identity and support is a cause for self esteem for all or almost all Communitys.

In the west you have to constantly compete and compete again to get a little respect self esteem and identity and to inshure your income while in the back of your head you know that when you are too old and weak to compete you will be mistreated and then cast away anyways.

Ironically in the real world, apart from western biased depictions, the upward mobility in the society (by marriage or job) inside the varna jati society in India is easier to achieve than in the meritocrazy in the UK and continental europe according to a modern study i recently read.

Darji
12 May 2010, 07:01 AM
Who says that it is rigid today, except biased and arrogant westerners or communists/maoists/jihadis who cannot look beyond the brim of their hat?

Are we reading the same forum? 99% of the debate started by saying "westerners can't be a hindu because of their varna (or lack of it)" are started by Hindu Indians, not the other groups you mentioned


As for the rest you say I think 99% of us agree and what we are all saying, my response was for those Indian Hindu's that can't seem to let go of an antiquated system based on a perversion of the Law of Manu worsened by a colonial governments motives. That's all. I know that the MAJORITY of Indian's do not feel this way.

FINALLY, I'm getting really sick of all the racial bollocks here. Yes, the British Empire did a lot of **** to India, guess what? I wasn't there, 99.9% of the west wasn't there. Not to mention you only had to deal with the British for a couple of hundred years, my people were repressed, starved, robbed by them for nearly a thousand years, you know what? It's in the past.

Also, while I'm at it, the term "arrogant westerners" gets tossed around a lot around here, all I got to say is "pot, kettle, black" for the ones here saying we are dirty, we have no right worshipping as we choose, we have no right to the dharma because of birth, and we are all mleccas because we were born outside India. All I'm going to say is "get over yourself".

I'm done

MahaHrada
12 May 2010, 07:12 AM
Are we reading the same forum? 99% of the debate started by saying "westerners can't be a hindu because of their varna (or lack of it)" are started by Hindu Indians, not the other groups you mentioned


As for the rest you say I think 99% of us agree and what we are all saying, my response was for those Indian Hindu's that can't seem to let go of an antiquated system based on a perversion of the Law of Manu worsened by a colonial governments motives. That's all. I know that the MAJORITY of Indian's do not feel this way.

FINALLY, I'm getting really sick of all the racial bollocks here. Yes, the British Empire did a lot of **** to India, guess what? I wasn't there, 99.9% of the west wasn't there. Not to mention you only had to deal with the British for a couple of hundred years, my people were repressed, starved, robbed by them for nearly a thousand years, you know what? It's in the past.

Also, while I'm at it, the term "arrogant westerners" gets tossed around a lot around here, all I got to say is "pot, kettle, black" for the ones here saying we are dirty, we have no right worshipping as we choose, we have no right to the dharma because of birth, and we are all mleccas because we were born outside India. All I'm going to say is "get over yourself".

I'm done

Forgot to take your prozac today?

Your outburst illustrates what i said quite well. Competition, dominant behaviour , rude speech, disrespect towards other ideas than what you define as standards, you show all the "virtues" needed to survive in the barbaric egalitarian society. You are demanding "rights" instead of willingness to learn adherence to ones own path and duty while showing respect for the rules of other communities, which is the meaning of Dharma and the basic idea of jati/varna distinction.

Darji
12 May 2010, 07:19 AM
No, I've been up for nearly 48 hours with only a 3 hour nap from a further 24. Hence my shortness

I do find it funny how you can talk all the smack you want about us, but if we say anything in return, we are barbaric. Interesting

MahaHrada
12 May 2010, 07:30 AM
No, I've been up for nearly 48 hours with only a 3 hour nap from a further 24. Hence my shortness

I do find it funny how you can talk all the smack you want about us, but if we say anything in return, we are barbaric. Interesting

I am not Indian i would even hesitate to call myself a Hindu if that matters to you.

Darji
12 May 2010, 07:41 AM
Nope doesn't matter to me at all, I'm not sure why you are taking what I say so personally. It was not directed towards you, nor was it even applied to you.

MahaHrada
12 May 2010, 07:54 AM
Nope doesn't matter to me at all, I'm not sure why you are taking what I say so personally. It was not directed towards you, nor was it even applied to you.

No you didn´t adress me you must have been talking to the Lamppost.

smaranam
12 May 2010, 08:00 AM
Namaste Darji

Try to understand what Maharhadaji is saying. It is your good fortune to have this discourse.

This very attitude has to be left behind to qualify as a disciple to learn even the ABCs of SanAtan Dharma. That's the trick.

The first prerequisite, is submission to the teacher, guide, to the ones there, to the ones more experienced in the Dharma, who have been explaining calmly. Our material intellect is to be used only to judge whether the person is guiding us in the right direction.

This is what i meant by "there will be more conditioning to overcome" , but it is not to be generalized for everyone new to the Dharma. In addition to attitude, there are culturally ingrained habits to overcome. Our past conditioning is not our fault. The fault is in identifying yourself with this body, hence indulging in false ego.

It is the misuse of free will that can go in the wrong direction, and collectively harm the Dharma, this is what some Hindus are afraid of, and their fear is not unreasonable, as they have seen it happen.

Please look at this as a test from the Lord. If one lives thru' it , ignoring the irrelevant without getting angry, then one is progressing in the right direction - towards Him.

Saying that birth in a varNa / jAti is a Divine indication of one's spiritual state is also correct. It is a result, fruit , of guNa karma of the past lives. However, It is not the only indication.

One can pass the good disciple test in this life irrespective of birth as an indication. How ? The Guru who is the representative of the Divine , is the judge.

Om Namo Bhagavate VAsudevAya

Darji
12 May 2010, 08:22 AM
Thank you for the wisdom Smaranam, I will contemplate on it.

I would like to assure everyone, I was not angry, just taken a little aback. I honestly am too tired to be posting

yajvan
12 May 2010, 11:52 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté ganeshprasad,


Perhaps you missed the verse i quoted, the above verse is repeated more or less in chapter 18 verse 47, which is what i had quoted, this verse follows from the duties described in previous verses, so the connection at least for me is not hard to make. Jai Shree Krishna

Thank you for taking the time to respond. Yes, I see and have read this śloka in chapter 18. The word used is svadharmo ( or svadharma स्वधर्म )

sva = one's own
dharma, remains my concern, if defined as occupation. This I do not see . I have mentioned the following
dharma defined as :

that which is established or firm , steadfast decree , statute , ordinance , law
according to right or rule , rightly , justly , according to the nature of anything
nature , character , peculiar condition or essential quality , property , mark This most essential word is rooted in dhṛ - to uphold, carry , maintain , preserve.

I see occupation as what one would do to earn a living, income. I see dharma as one's self that is there 7 x 24 x 365, not just at work but the expansion of one's self to SELF. Occupation may be a component of dharma, but is not one's occupation.
And that is where we differ. I have checked several resources and interpretations and the only author I see equating dharma to occupation is svāmī prabhupāda

Śrī Jñānadeva' or Jñāeśvarī, and his commentary of Bhāvārṭa Dīpikā ( his commentary on the Bhāgavad gītā) uses the words proper code of conduct;
Abhinavagupta-ji uses the word dharma and does not convert it to an English equal;
S.Rādhākṛṣṇan uses one's own law
My teacher only uses the word dharma, then takes time to explain this word as he reivews the śloka and talks of the profound meaning of this word.
If one looked to Chapter 1 of the Bhāgavad gītā and reviews śloka 40-44 and subsutituted occupation for dharma , it is my assessment the verses no longer make sense.
Example - chapt 1, 40th śloka
The age-old family occupations (dharma-s) are lost in the destruction of a family. Its occupation (dharma) lost adharma overtakes the entire family
See verse 43, chapt 1 and substitute occupation for dharma
See verse 44, chapt 1 and substitute occupation for dharma
I have once more checked M.Monier-Williams Sanscrit to English dictionary. No callout of 'occupation' exists for dharma
I have checked the Mahābhārata , by Kisari Mohan Ganguli - his favorite word for dharma is 'duty'. I think this falls short of the robustness of dharma, but respect his translation.
One more book I use is the Dictionary of Indian Philosophy; there too dharma is called out as righteousness, merit, duty, etc.
This book also takes the time to go to dharma's root meaning of dhṛ . The book describes 13 different ways dharma can be used, applied and found in various schools i.e.

from the mīmāṁṣa school, to the nyāya-vaiseṣika schools and even the sāṁkhya-yoga schools , none offer occupation = dharma.
Hence my brain cramp of dharma being = to occupation.

praṇām

Ganeshprasad
12 May 2010, 02:20 PM
Pranam Yajvan ji


hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

being = to occupation.

praṇām



Yes I see your point, I am sorry to have you taxed your brains, because I would not insist on the translation dharma = occupation, although as you agree there is component within it.

The Gita I read is in my own language Guajarati it does not substitute dharma because it conveys the same meaning. My understanding remains the same as taking the previous verses together.

Jai Shree Krishna

yajvan
12 May 2010, 07:51 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté ganeshprasad,


Pranam Yajvan ji

Yes I see your point, I am sorry to have you taxed your brains, because I would not insist on the translation dharma = occupation, although as you agree there is component within it.

It is always good to read and re-read the śloka's of the Bhāgavad gītā. Only deeper meanings come out. But the meanings have always been there , no? So where do they come from? Consciousness , and I am the benificiary. So the taxing was fruitful and no sorrow can come from this....

Thank you again for taking the time ganeshprasad, to collect your thoughts and present them. We both benefit and perhaps a reader or two here at HDF.

praṇām

atanu
12 May 2010, 11:34 PM
Namaste ganesh prasad ji,

Sir One thing I cant understand, Why you always consider those people who say 'varna comes from guna/sanskaar' as being wrong and incorrect. I can respect your view whn you say one should stick to work of his own varna , but then I dont necessarily have to believe in it. ----

namah shivvay.

Namaste Isa

I think this is a very nicely and logically written post. I wish to add a few points wrt to the red part above that I think is not exact representation of Ganeshprasadji's thought (I may be wrong but what follows is my view).


We, including me, tend to see who else is Brahmin or Khatriya or Shudra etc. Or, in more general terms, we categorise us and them. Then we protect I-Us, thinking that I-Us must win at the cost of He-They.

The intent of scripture, as per me, is not to teach that. The intent (in the first place) is to point to questions: "What I am?" and "What my natural path is?". If this is remembered then there would arise no klesha.

Bhagawan, I think is the Supreme Manager/Leader who places each individual in most suitable ambience. Discontentment about this is just discontentment and ignorance.

For example, most people in this world nurse the idea of leadership. But the truth is that Adityas-Rudras are the leaders and and all others are followers. It is true that without a dose of confusion that hides the simple truth that an ego-mind-body is just a puppet, the Universe may become dull. Yet some guys (egos) just surmise as to what is puppet and what is not.

Om Namah Shivaya

isavasya
13 May 2010, 02:43 AM
Pranam isavasya ji

No i am not against Guna Karma, just that who is the authority that would decide that, who would be a perfect judge that knows the inner desires of a jiva? and if birth is just an accident and has nothing to do with Guna Karma then i am afraid i am wasting my time here.
Birth affords the only measurable prerequisite for determining how a child should be trained.

Namaste ganesh prasad ji,



Nice to see your reply, I will just add, yes nobody here is perfect judge to know inner desires of a mortal, but his karma and social behavior over a long time may reflect his sanskaar, and can be taken as judge to some extent. It's really difficult to call some one a brahmin in today's world (and all through kaliyuga), but not much difficult, to call some one kshatriye or vaishya in today's world, as these guna's are much more discernible by naked eyes. As for calling one self brahmin, I dont think a real vipra will be much concerned what others believe him to be, he is much more concerned in leaving all such ego's behind. I Know you also have a lot of love for dharma, and interpret the scriptures as you believe it is right to do so, but I beg to respectfully differ with you sir.





Namaste Isa



Bhagawan, I think is the Supreme Manager/Leader who places each individual in most suitable ambience. Discontentment about this is just discontentment and ignorance.



Om Namah Shivaya

namaste Atnau ji,
Thats true sir and exactly what I also believe, Its parmatma, who places an individual and nurtures his capabilities, discontentment to realize his position either by himself or by others is ignorance.

namah shivvay

devotee
13 May 2010, 06:20 AM
Dear Darji,



As for the rest you say I think 99% of us agree and what we are all saying, my response was for those Indian Hindu's that can't seem to let go of an antiquated system based on a perversion of the Law of Manu worsened by a colonial governments motives. That's all. I know that the MAJORITY of Indian's do not feel this way.

FINALLY, I'm getting really sick of all the racial bollocks here. Yes, the British Empire did a lot of **** to India, guess what? I wasn't there, 99.9% of the west wasn't there. Not to mention you only had to deal with the British for a couple of hundred years, my people were repressed, starved, robbed by them for nearly a thousand years, you know what? It's in the past.


There are very few Indians who carry this anger against foreigners. If there is one who has this feeling, you will find 10 others who are against such views. So, you should not be unnecessarily perturbed. If foreigners were really considered unacceptable to Hindus, why would our great Hindu Saints e.g. Swami Vivekananda, Jiddu Krishnamurthy, Maharishi Yogananda, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Swami Srila Prabhupad, many saints from Kashmir Shaivism etc. visit foreign lands and set up their religious institutions there ? And you should be aware that they had many non-indian disciples who scored over Indians in their times. The saints don't recognise the man-made international boundaries. The religion doesn't ask us to be confined within a territory by imaginary lines drawn on map. Who on this forum is greater that any of the saints mentioned above ?

You become a great Hindu by your own good conduct & not by your birth in a certain geographical region.

OM

satay
13 May 2010, 09:48 AM
namaskar,

I don't know why varna/jati or caste system is even of any importance to a non-indian. Why pay so much attention to it?

Why not just 'live' like a hindu.
If you don't like indian food, fine.
If you don't like india, fine.
If you don't like indians, fine.
If you don't like indian clothes, fine.
If you rather not care for the cows, fine.

Why care about all this if you are not an indian? These things are only relevant to Indians so...just 'be' a hindu as best as you can in this life. next life, we will all be born based on your sanskar and vasanas anyway...so...


Indians are not going to give up their caste or varna or jati (well, for sure I am not) just because non-indians don't 'get it' or don't like it or whatever other reason. So, just get over this fact.

Sorry for sounding too frustrated but I keep reading these posts and threads about caste/varna again and again.


Just be a Hindu!

Darji
13 May 2010, 10:28 AM
Satay, your post is true, we as westerners shouldn't care about varna/jati &tc. &tc. but it does seem some people think in order to to be "Hindu" you have to have varna. At least this is what I get from some of the posts. I'm not sure about the other western practitioners here but I feel, if varna is so important there is no reason westerners can not have varna. Varna was used in pre-christian europe and it is still alive in our "genetic memory", hell one could argue the social structure of Victorian England was sort of a cultural attempt at reestablishing european caste.

Never the less, as we see in another active post at the moment, Indian culture is so interwoven into hinduism, it's hard to have one without the other, and varna/ jati in some form or another is still relevant to Indians, thus making it relevant to us westerners who are trying to straddle the fence between serving god and being accepted into the community. I just think we need a better understanding of varna, all of us, as it is painful to know you have sanatana dharma in your heart and to be ostracized, told we are not worthy all because we don't have a varna.

I mean hell, if India and sanskrit is the mother of European civilization as proposed by the "Out of India" theory this means were are the same culture, just our own invasion (by christianity) lead us astray and we are now finding our way back. I rejoice in this notion we are finding our way back into Krishna's love.

So in closing, if we are the same culture (as DNA, linguistics and some material evidence suggests) just separated by a fork in the path that is now converging, why not allow us into the fold of varna if it is so important to be brought up again and again to discount us? If it is based on linage, I'm a Maclochlainn of the Cenél nEóġain branch, descendant of Eógan mac Néill of the Uí Néill, Lords of Ulster, descendants of Niall Noígíallach. Which would put me firmly in the Kshatriya varna. But in the end, it only matters as much as it matters to others as long as it is thrown into our faces. :)

satay
13 May 2010, 11:18 AM
namaste Darji,


as it is painful to know you have sanatana dharma in your heart and to be ostracized, told we are not worthy all because we don't have a varna.


With respect, the mentality that 'we must be accepted into a varna because ...' is baggage from non-dharmic religions (due to karma from previous lives). If one completely 'accepts' the reincarnation principle, then I think that there will be no such mentality and definitely no 'rush' to be accepted into varna/caste/jati. The understanding that there is no 'rush' to be accepted is clearly evident from many of the so called western hindus here on HDF. I am thinking of MahaHrada, Eastern and Yajvan as I write this sentence.

When one is ready and karma ripens, universe will work it so that one will be in the right place, right country, right varna etc. etc.

Let's be patient.

That said, there are those in India that want to preserve the tradition, preserve the old, preserve the lineage. In some weird sort of way, I see their point. And in my opinion, we (indians and non-indian hindus) shouldn't blame them for this.

Ganeshprasad
13 May 2010, 11:41 AM
Pranam Satay


namaskar,

I don't know why varna/jati or caste system is even of any importance to a non-indian. Why pay so much attention to it?

Why not just 'live' like a hindu.
If you don't like indian food, fine.
If you don't like india, fine.
If you don't like indians, fine.
If you don't like indian clothes, fine.
If you rather not care for the cows, fine.

Why care about all this if you are not an indian? These things are only relevant to Indians so...just 'be' a hindu as best as you can in this life. next life, we will all be born based on your sanskar and vasanas anyway...so...


Indians are not going to give up their caste or varna or jati (well, for sure I am not) just because non-indians don't 'get it' or don't like it or whatever other reason. So, just get over this fact.

Sorry for sounding too frustrated but I keep reading these posts and threads about caste/varna again and again.


Just be a Hindu!

I echo your sentiment with one exception, Go Raksha cow protection is very dear to Lord Krishna, if we neglect Cow, by extension we neglect our mother then we cease to be a proper Hindu.

Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
13 May 2010, 12:32 PM
Pranam Isavasya


Nice to see your reply, I will just add, yes nobody here is perfect judge to know inner desires of a mortal, but his karma and social behavior over a long time may reflect his sanskaar, and can be taken as judge to some extent.

Thanks for your reply. If you agree the perfect judge is a problem for us mortal then why do you question a perfect person who gave us the birth? Unless off course if you think birth is an accident.

You say over a long time we may be able to judge someone, don’t you think by this time the real training one was required to have at an early stage is missed?
 


It's really difficult to call some one a brahmin in today's world (and all through kaliyuga), but not much difficult, to call some one kshatriye or vaishya in today's world, as these guna's are much more discernible by naked eyes.

Todays world or the past only yardstick was the birth, the training was according to ones gotra, Birth affords the only measureable prerequisite for determining how a child should be trained. Otherwise it would be subjective (long time according to you) for one to determine whether one should be a brahmana, a kshatriya, etc
 


As for calling one self brahmin, I dont think a real vipra will be much concerned what others believe him to be, he is much more concerned in leaving all such ego's behind.

May be, but he would, if he had any offspring, he sure would train him as a Brahmin.
 


I Know you also have a lot of love for dharma, and interpret the scriptures as you believe it is right to do so, but I beg to respectfully differ with you sir.

You are perfectly entitle to you opinion.

Jai Shree Krishna

Ekanta
13 May 2010, 12:35 PM
I don't know why varna/jati or caste system is even of any importance to a non-indian. Why pay so much attention to it?
...
Why care about all this if you are not an indian? These things are only relevant to Indians so...

Because varna is based on guna/karma and that is everywhere?
Because it was created by God?
Because the welfare of society depends on it?

Eastern Mind
13 May 2010, 01:03 PM
Vannakkam Darji, Satay, eta al:

As a western Hindu, I take no notice of caste or varna. At least I do not base my decisions on how I treat others at all on it. I do notice the Brahmin priest for example. Other than that, I don't notice it much. All souls are Siva's souls.

An Indian Hindu who is into caste can go ahead and think whatever they want of me. I am an outcaste to some and a Brahmin to others. I have done the job of a Brahmin, and the lowly jobs of untouchables. Who cares? I clean up the garbage at the temple.

I was lucky to find my svadharma at an early age so was 'casted' (classed) by that. But so what. The Gandhian in me made me have students walk beside me, not behind me, at school. As far as I know, I was one of few teachers to use the student washroom instead of the staff washroom. So what? When I went to teacher conventions, all in all they seemed to be a snobby lot. But I was one of them. I helped the janitor or cleaned the child's puke off the classroom floor. So what?

A North Indian style temple kicked me out. Their loss, I guess. Perhaps I should have told them about my wish to donate a million dollars before they kicked me out. Too late for them now as the money went elsewhere.

My advice to other western 'Hindus' is just to ignore caste and go about your duty. The keen observer will place you where you should be anyway, and the non-keen observer needn't be worried about.

Aum Namasivaya

satay
13 May 2010, 01:59 PM
Namaste Eastern,


My advice to other western 'Hindus' is just to ignore caste and go about your duty. The keen observer will place you where you should be anyway, and the non-keen observer needn't be worried about.

Aum Namasivaya

That's precisely what I wanted to say but three paragraphs later... probably still couldn't get my point across. :)

Ekanta
13 May 2010, 03:03 PM
As a western Hindu, I take no notice of caste or varna. At least I do not base my decisions on how I treat others at all on it. ...All souls are Siva's souls.
Namaste EM. There are two aspects in this. Sure all a Siva's souls... and all are equal and one and all should be treated equally. But what is varna? Its not Siva's soul, its prakriti. We have different qualities (gunas) in different quantities and that affects our behaviour. For example we are told to seek the company of the good (sattvic) and avoid the company of the bad (tamistic). We should not play with a cobra even if its siva's soul. Further, what happens to society if its run by tamistic people and the same interpret scriptures and decides what is right and wrong? Thus all can not be treated equally since prakriti makes a difference.

My advice to other western 'Hindus' is just to ignore caste and go about your duty. The keen observer will place you where you should be anyway, and the non-keen observer needn't be worried about.
Sure I dont bother much with caste and I dont bother much about where an observer will place me. But its not so much about where someone will place me as it is about society in totality. Are the wise and noble (Brahmanas/Kshatriyas) really in charge in society? Or is it those driven by desire and ignorance (Vaisyas/Sudras)? Thats not an unimportant question.

Eastern Mind
13 May 2010, 03:26 PM
Vannakkam Ekanta:

I wouldn't disagree: The world INMO, is run by a combination of rajistic and tamistic people. That is why most of us are wary of politicians. But one has to remember this is the Kali Yuga. This is the nature of our little groups of souls evolution.

I prefer to think of people composed of gunas rather than caste. Its more accurate, now that we have had so much intermingling, and cross caste stuff.

Of course we choose our company. that is only natural common sense.

Aum Namasivaya

Ganeshprasad
13 May 2010, 03:59 PM
Pranam all

It seems I am one off the offender here, responsible for causing a lot of pain for those who are new to Hindu dharma, and to a lot of progressive born Hindus, who see Varna as a blot. We all cry Guna Karma yet no one can give me an authority who would decide that fate for all the jivas, from jatKarma to all sanskaras.
I make no apology to later and my debate is primarily with them. I respect their views that does not mean I have to agree with them. If anyone can convince me of a system by which or an authority who can determine a varna of an individual which is acceptable to all, then it would be perfect, unfortunately that is not going to be anytime soon.
I have a faith in Karma and reincarnation and I totally subscribe to fact that the birth of an individual is not random but based on Guna Karma. If Varna can not be decided on this, then I am afraid there is no authority in the world that can make that judgment for the masses, considering the training need to start at early stage.


For those who are new to SD I see no sense to formally join the Varna system because I like to think that the primarily reason to explore Hindu dharma, is to seek that ultimate goal and I hope varna system is not that goal, but those who fail in their endeavour will surely get their chance to fulfil their desires.

After taking such a birth, O Arjuna, one regains the knowledge acquired in the previous life, and strives again to achieve perfection. (6.43)

I like to think I have never discourage any one from adopting Hindu Dharma, but I would caution anyone embark on this path not to expect bed of roses, it is like walking on a double edge sword.

Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
13 May 2010, 04:03 PM
Pranam


Because varna is based on guna/karma and that is everywhere?
Because it was created by God?
Because the welfare of society depends on it?

Yes guna karma,but they are very fickle, it changes with circumstances and there are lots of guna overlaps from varna to varna but I like to think varna is not something that changes with whims nor is it advisable, never mind all the confusion that it would bring.

Arjun was overcome by grief wanted to retire and become an ascetic why did Lord Krishna remind him of Kshatrya Dharma even though he was displaying at that point Brahmin guna of compassion and actually wanted to renounce everthing?

Because Arjuna was born a kshatriya and he was obligated to follow kshatriya dharma. Arjuna did not get promoted to brahmin status because of his compassion.

Jai Shree Krishna

satay
13 May 2010, 04:10 PM
namaskar,



Are the wise and noble (Brahmanas/Kshatriyas) really in charge in society? Or is it those driven by desire and ignorance (Vaisyas/Sudras)? Thats not an unimportant question.

Well, that's a whole different discussion. Since you have been to India you must know that most brahmins are living well below poverty...

satay
13 May 2010, 04:13 PM
Arjuna did not get promoted to brahmin status because of his compassion.

Jai Shree Krishna

or to the Buddha or 'enlightened swami' or 'everything is same' (as in radical universalism) status. ;)

Anyway, I leave this thread...

Ekanta
13 May 2010, 05:32 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasad

Yes guna karma,but they are very fickle, it changes with circumstances and there are lots of guna overlaps from varna to varna but I like to think varna is not something that changes with whims nor is it advisable, never mind all the confusion that it would bring.
Its already quite in confusion. But I leave that to the indians.

Arjun was overcome by grief wanted to retire and become an ascetic why did Lord Krishna remind him of Kshatrya Dharma even though he was displaying at that point Brahmin guna of compassion and actually wanted to renounce everthing?
He was in deep illusion about his dharma, can that be said to be Brahmin guna? His compassion again was based on illusion of maya, i.e. body-ID.
Further, if we examine the dialogue we find that Krishna didnt ask Arjuna to follow his Kshatrya Dharma but actually to follow his Sva-Dharma.

2.31 Further, having regard to your own duty [sva-dharmam], you should not waver, for there is nothing higher for a Kshatriya than a righteous [dharmyāt] war.
2.33 But, if you will not fight in this righteous [dharmyam] war, then, having abandoned your duty [sva-dharmam] and fame [kīrtim], you shall incur sin [pāpam].

18.47. Better is one’s own duty [sva-dharmaḥ] (though) destitute of merits [viguṇaḥ], than the duty of another [para-dharmāt] well performed [su-anuṣṭhitāt]. He who does the duty [karma] ordained by his own nature [svabhāva] incurs no sin [kilbiṣam].

18.41. Of Brahmanas [brāhmaṇa], Kshatriyas [kṣatriya] and Vaishyas [viśām], as also the Sudras [śūdrāṇām], O Arjuna, the duties [karmāṇi] are distributed according to the qualities [guṇaiḥ] born of their own nature [svabhāva]!

We can here see that Arjuna is told to follow sva-dharma, which is ordained by his own nature [svabhāva] which in turn is decided by gunas. So... how do we solve the riddle about sva-dharma/ svabhāva/ guṇa?



Because Arjuna was born a kshatriya and he was obligated to follow kshatriya dharma. Arjuna did not get promoted to brahmin status because of his compassion.
That compassion again was illusion so no reason to promote him because of it right? However, why was Arjuna selected for the Gita? Why wasnt a Brahmin selected?

isavasya
13 May 2010, 06:03 PM
Namaste ganesh prasad ji,



You say over a long time we may be able to judge someone, don’t you think by this time the real training one was required to have at an early stage is missed?



Which training are you talking about ganesh prasad ji, guna karma comes from learning, dont you think a true brahmana can teach brahman vidya to non-brahamana too. vivekananda said, one ramkrishna can produce 100's of vivekananda.



yes If you are saying some things are better learnt from childhood I will agree for part of karmakanda, but mimamsa is dead a long time ago. How many srauta brahmins are alive today ? Do you know duties of brahmana , what should be their occupation? Daily routines? People working in Infosys, wipro, multinational companies and earning like vaishya or sudra are not brahmana sir. Please know that brahmanas engaging in these professions are taken below sudra according to shastra. How many brahmins today do yagna, havana daily for world peace. Do brahmins have fire burning in their homes ?There are above 6 crores brahmins in india, how many of them follow the prescribed duties, yet you take them to be brahmin, and even their next generation. I on the contrary, have opinion that those who show and practice brahmanical qualities are brahmins, kashtriye qualities are kshatriye and so on.



Todays world or the past only yardstick was the birth, the training was according to ones gotra, Birth affords the only measureable prerequisite for determining how a child should be trained. Otherwise it would be subjective (long time according to you) for one to determine whether one should be a brahmana, a kshatriya, etc

Only birth ? I already wrote about satyakama, ailush,aitreya mahidasa, and others previously. The pramana comes from shruti.


Is it so subjective to determine a ksahtriye ? Will you take a army jawan who lets down his life for his country, as many do for a khastriye or will you count him by his caste ? There are many soldiers dying in kashmir protecting our country, or dying in moaist attacks protecting their citizens who dont belong to kshatriye varna by birth. what is your opinion about such martyrs ?Are they not kshatriye ? Similarly a person born in sudra family can be a good entrepreneur and give jobs to many poor people and help the economy. will he not be counted a vaishya.? Similarly one can be a brahmin, though it's very difficult and declaring him a brahmana is much more subjective and not as clear as kshatriye or vasihya.
 

Thanks for your reply. If you agree the perfect judge is a problem for us mortal then why do you question a perfect person who gave us the birth? Unless off course if you think birth is an accident.

I never believe birth is an accident, I believe god blesses us with birth in challenging or easy circumstances. I believe if we had earned a lot of punya in previous birth we get a birth in family with good values, ethics and morality and not necessarily brahmin caste or kshatriye caste or shudra caste as you describe today. By birth even a child born in a brahmana family is a sudra only. Janmana jayate sudrah samskarad bhaved dvijah veda-pathad bhaved vipro brahma janatiti brahmanah.By birth one is a sudra, by the purificatory process one becomes a dvija, by study of the Vedas one becomes a vipra, and one who knows Brahman is a brahmana.



May be, but he would, if he had any offspring, he sure would train him as a Brahmin.

yes he would, But read what I wrote, a real vipra, not any brahmin -bandhu who lives life of vaishya,kshatriye or shudra.



It seems I am one off the offender here, responsible for causing a lot of pain for those who are new to Hindu dharma, and to a lot of progressive born Hindus, who see Varna as a blot. We all cry Guna Karma yet no one can give me an authority who would decide that fate for all the jivas, from jatKarma to all sanskaras.
I make no apology to later and my debate is primarily with them. I respect their views that does not mean I have to agree with them. If anyone can convince me of a system by which or an authority who can determine a varna of an individual which is acceptable to all, then it would be perfect, unfortunately that is not going to be anytime soon.



May i know who said varna a blot ganesh prsasad ji ? Are you talking about prof nara, well he was a self proclaimed atheist, even though a brahmin by birth. If you are pointing to me, then I have never said any such thing, on the contrary read that thread I told prof Nara that varna is the best system ever. If i talk about guna based varna dharma, it doesnt amount to believing it is blot. I believe many hindu elites, scholars including many brahmins share feelings of these 'progressive' hindus. Central authority ?Just as jaichand the traitor cant be called kshatriye in spite of getting birth in kshatriye family. who decides who's what ? A person's conduct. Dharmraj yudhisthir confirmed it too.


Namah shivvay

 

Satyaban
13 May 2010, 09:06 PM
Namaste

Perhaps wondering a little off topic but what went wrong? The varna system became the cast system because those in the upper echelons of society decided that their positions were determined by birth and inheritary. Those born in the lower strata of society were treated like dirt because they were born into their status by karma.

Am I wrong?

devotee
13 May 2010, 11:17 PM
I don't know why varna/jati or caste system is even of any importance to a non-indian. Why pay so much attention to it?

Why not just 'live' like a hindu.
If you don't like indian food, fine.
If you don't like india, fine.
If you don't like indians, fine.
If you don't like indian clothes, fine.
If you rather not care for the cows, fine.

Why care about all this if you are not an indian? These things are only relevant to Indians so...just 'be' a hindu as best as you can in this life.


Nice Post, Satay ! I agree with the above except the "cow" part. (can't help it .... the sanskars are too strong !) The caste system is relevant only to Indians and India. The non-Indians should not worry about it.

The best advice : Just be a Hindu as best as you can in this life !

Let's all Indians and non-Indian Hindus work towards becoming the best possible Hindus in this life. :)

OM

TatTvamAsi
14 May 2010, 12:30 AM
Namaste

Perhaps wondering a little off topic but what went wrong? The varna system became the cast system because those in the upper echelons of society decided that their positions were determined by birth and inheritary. Those born in the lower strata of society were treated like dirt because they were born into their status by karma.

Am I wrong?

What is "inheritary"?

Secondly, it's not quite as simple as you stated. "upper echelons" in society is not equated with material wealth like it is in the west. In Hinduism, spiritual wealth, not even mere scriptural knowledge, is considered the 'highest'. Thus, those with the strongest inclination towards learning the Vedas (the nature of reality) were accorded the most respect among the citizens. Their (Brahmins') interests were transcendental and was for the wellbeing of the WHOLE society. It was, is, and never will be about the individual. That is something non-Indians/non-Hindus have a really hard time understanding.

The "lower" castes, and it is actually best not to use such terms, were stuck with their vocational training from father to son as was the Brahmin boy's except in the case of Brahmins and other dvIjA (twice-born males), they went to study the Vedas under the tutelage of a self-realized guru during their brahmacarya (until ~24). The sUdrAs were discouraged from learning the Vedas for several reasons. The untouchables (non-Hindus/non-Indians) are far too low to comprehend even the bASyAs (commentaries), let alone the real thing. Their lifestyle was/is not conducive to spirituality at all and thus they were/are kept aloof. The same tradition continues today.

Everyone is born according to their vAsanAs (latent tendencies from previous births). Thus, the guna/karma from previous births determine where, when, and whom you are born to.

Even the gItA discourages varnasankara (admixture of castes).

TatTvamAsi
14 May 2010, 12:38 AM
why is caste brought up every couple of weeks on HDF. do these people ever use the 'search' button? :rolleyes:

Varnashrama Dharma (Caste System) is very easy to explain:

CASTE is good.

--Caste is determined by birth, character, and action. The last two determined/determines the previous/next birth. ;)

CASTEISM is bad.

--Casteism, or discrimination based on caste, arises due to societal norms which have broken down over millenia in India. Birth became the presiding factor and the other two, character & action, were relegated to secondary status. Thus, those being born in so-called "higher" castes ill-treated some of the "lower" caste people. Education of Varnashrama Dharma can eradicate casteISM.

Many people, especially mlecchas, have a knee-jerk reaction to Varna.

In India, we have a habit of saying what we mean and meaning what we say. :)

End of story.

Philippe*
14 May 2010, 02:58 AM
We might be placed somewhere at birth for some reason. But it does not mean that everyone has to be stuck all life long in the same social configuration. Thinking that all the kids have to follow the same way of their parents because of their nature and that it is the best for them and the society shows a lack of maturity and understanding of life and human nature. As a Science teacher, I can notice for sure that it is not always the best for the young and the society.

Varna in a broad sense is a fact, there are basically four types found in every society. There are also people out of the society for some reasons. As far as I am concerned I do not care about jati, it does not change the fact of gunas and varnas in the broad sense or social types exist outside this Indian social system. I for one strive to realize all 4 ideals in an integral way in my life, i.e. basically wisdom, force, harmony, service.

Of course it matters for Westerners, this is also one of the reasons why Westerners are more interested in Buddhism. Not necessarily because they want to join some jati, but it is annoying to be considered a second citizen by a few ignorant people in the spiritual field when one strives for liberation and harmony.

By the way, maybe without this mindset : one can be Hindu only by birth, no one can convert, stay in your caste, there would not have been so many muslims today in India, maybe Pakistan, Bangladesh would not have existed. Despite all the atrocities, violence has not always been used for conversions. There is also karma for such tendencies.

Philippe

Darji
14 May 2010, 07:53 AM
Withdrawn as I do not wish to be brought to another's level, I am better than that and no matter how much sense we make, there are some things so engrained in us we can never change it in others even if the scriptures support our ideas.

Satyaban
14 May 2010, 12:09 PM
why is caste brought up every couple of weeks on HDF. do these people ever use the 'search' button? :rolleyes:

Varnashrama Dharma (Caste System) is very easy to explain:

CASTE is good.

--Caste is determined by birth, character, and action. The last two determined/determines the previous/next birth. ;)

CASTEISM is bad.

--Casteism, or discrimination based on caste, arises due to societal norms which have broken down over millenia in India. Birth became the presiding factor and the other two, character & action, were relegated to secondary status. Thus, those being born in so-called "higher" castes ill-treated some of the "lower" caste people. Education of Varnashrama Dharma can eradicate casteISM.

Many people, especially mlecchas, have a knee-jerk reaction to Varna.

In India, we have a habit of saying what we mean and meaning what we say. :)

End of story.


Don't get so worked up.:)
I have no problem with varnadharma but do you agree with me that the system has been perverted. Also do you agree that karma presents challenges to be overcome for the evolution of the soul?

devotee
14 May 2010, 11:41 PM
By the way, maybe without this mindset : one can be Hindu only by birth, no one can convert, stay in your caste, there would not have been so many muslims today in India, maybe Pakistan, Bangladesh would not have existed. Despite all the atrocities, violence has not always been used for conversions. There is also karma for such tendencies.


You are absolutely right ! Unfortunately people with such mindset forget to see how much harm they are doing to Hinduism. The Hindu Society has changed a lot today due to tireless efforts of many great saints but just 200 years ago (before India's independence), it was very easy to be thrown out of Hindu society and there was no path to return back ! How stupid and how unfortunate ? On one hand Abrahimic missionaries are leaving no stone unturned to convert people & on the other we are here trying to create fissure in our own society by casteism. We are treating our own people like sub-humans in the name of caste ! This is the reason we lost hundreds of thousands of our hindu tribals to christianity. We lost another hundreds of thousands of our people to Islam and also to Buddhism.

But did we learn any lesson ? When well educated Hindus like TTA have this mentality ... how can we blame the semi-literate ignorant people who in one way or the other harming the cause of Hindutava in the world ?

The Eastern religions are the hope to save this world from going spiritually bankrupt. The spiritual seeker fed up from Christianity and Islam are trying to come to Hindu fold which is a very good sign for peace for this entire world. If we Hindus encourage them ... if we go a certain distance to help them .... we can get many such seekers. And that would create a ripple effect .... one will bring another ten and that would spread the great eastern philosophy in this world and bring peace in this world.

But alas ! What are doing here ? We are trying tooth and nail to discourage them .... "hey you are dirty" ... "you are mlechha" .... "you are avarna" etc. etc. .... is this the civilised way we learnt from our ancestors to greet our guests ? Are we really considering our guests as God as we are taught ? This is the reason that even after being so spiritually so rich we Hindus are not increasing in number but the Islam is increasing ... Buddhism is increasing (Buddhism ... which is just a tiny part of whole of Hinduism !).

And let's all remember ... my words may be ignored ... I may not be considered worthy for being given any serious thought to my words ... but let's not forget Lord Krishna's words .... hurting anyone's sentiments is hurting the God in the heart of everyone. How are we going to save ourselves from our own Karma ?

OM

TatTvamAsi
15 May 2010, 01:07 AM
We might be placed somewhere at birth for some reason.

Except, it is not "some" reason that you are born in a certain place etc. Actions & character from previous births, their fruits, appropriately termed karmaphala, manifest at different junctions in one's journey (of the jIvA--soul).

Thus, taking responsibility for one's actions, which sounds awfully "right-wing" to most lib-left idiots, is actually stressed in Hinduism. There is no action that is not taken without some karmic flow behind it. Perhaps one is unaware of it at that time (with the limited mind), but remember, if God was God, there is nothing that happens independently or 'randomly'. This is why we say, if certain things in life persist, perhaps it was meant to happen.


But it does not mean that everyone has to be stuck all life long in the same social configuration.

And it never was that way! Until the 20th century, Varnashrama was never looked upon as oppressive except by the untouchables (Britishers), who then used it to their advantage in subjugating the local populace. Resentment started to build among the masses and what resulted? Massive anti-Brahminism and in the case of certain states in India, vehement anti-Hinduism. All this occurred due to the ignorance of a few, ill-treatment by some Brahmins, and the manipulation of the purport of the system as a whole by both Indians and foreigners.


Varna in a broad sense is a fact, there are basically four types found in every society. There are also people out of the society for some reasons. As far as I am concerned I do not care about jati, it does not change the fact of gunas and varnas in the broad sense or social types exist outside this Indian social system. I for one strive to realize all 4 ideals in an integral way in my life, i.e. basically wisdom, force, harmony, service.

Hate to break it to you, but, "you" don't matter at all. That is actually the basic message of Sanatana Dharma. This is the fundamental dichotomy between Eastern philosophy and Western ones where the emphasis on the individual is encouraged in the case of the latter and discouraged in that of the former. Thus, for someone coming from that (western) mindset, Varnashrama looks "evil" and is misconstrued as manipulative and oppressive of the unprivileged in society.

Yet, most of these crusaders against caste, who are filled to the brim with ignorance and hubris, don't know that Brahmins, the "high" caste people, are almost always materially poor! They immediately think it is the "rich, manipulative rascal" vs. the 'hardworking, under-privileged plebeian'. It was never that way. Without the knowledge of Indian history and Hinduism, you are nobody to be making derisive remarks about caste. That is why I put my opinions bluntly. Giving credence to your, and other westerners', misinformed mentality would be a great mistake and so I try to snip it at the bud.

Apart from BIRTH, CHARACTER, and ACTION, LIFESTYLE (which involves character, action, and birth) is also very important. Thus, this is why Hindus have no qualms about calling a spade a spade.


Of course it matters for Westerners, this is also one of the reasons why Westerners are more interested in Buddhism.

So? And that's good then! Go to Buddhism. That is my point! You people are not ready for Hinduism; you have not evolved enough. Thus, sticking to something more palatable to you might be the best bet (for all).


By the way, maybe without this mindset : one can be Hindu only by birth, no one can convert, stay in your caste, there would not have been so many muslims today in India, maybe Pakistan, Bangladesh would not have existed. Despite all the atrocities, violence has not always been used for conversions. There is also karma for such tendencies.

Bending the truth and changing facts to cajole someone is not what Hindus do. Unfortunately, many so-called Hindus in the modern day seem to put aside facts and principles of Hindu philosophy to be accommodating; something I think is noble, but unwise in the long run for several reasons. A Hindu is born, not converted. End of story. There have been exceptions and that's fine, but it is not something to be trifled with.

And regarding pakistan & bangladesh, you are completely mistaken. pakistan exists due to the inability of muslims to coexist with others peacefully and the rascality of the British. bangladesh exists because of India; without which those scumbags would be licking the shoes of pakistanis today. Again, this proves my point I made earlier. Don't talk about something you have no clue about--Indian history.

And last but not least, it is ONLY because of the strength of the caste system that India is still Hindu. It is only because of Varnashrama Dharma that India is not a muslim/christian/communist country. So, caste is not going away. Casteism on the other hand, we can do without.

TatTvamAsi
15 May 2010, 01:18 AM
Don't get so worked up.:)
I have no problem with varnadharma but do you agree with me that the system has been perverted. Also do you agree that karma presents challenges to be overcome for the evolution of the soul?

The system was, is, and always will be perfect. Otherwise, we'd be practicing something manmade and imperfect! Varnashrama Dharma is from the Lord! Thus, there are no imperfections.

Its application on the other hand, of course, there have been innumerable misapplications of Varnashrama. Why? We are not in the guidance of seers and are instead filled with hubris and misinformation; myself included.

Regarding karma, I'm afraid you need to read more about it. Karma is not a 'separate' entity that keeps tabs on what you do and when to dock you or give you brownie points. It is your own making through thoughts, deeds, and intentions; physically, emotionally, and mentally. Thus, it is like a mist that surrounds our jIvA; that clouds the undifferentiated AtmA. Karma is borne as a result of functioning through the three gunAs; sattva, rajas, and tamas. Sri Krishna tells us in the GitA that none, not even the subtlest life-form is free from the three gunAs. Thus, in that sense, they are a 'challenge'. However, we don't take births on a whim; we take births due to unfulfilled desires, vAsanAs, and the kArmic flow. When one realizes that the apparent separation from "another" is not based in reality, one realizes "TAT TVAM ASI"! At which, according to the Vedas, we transcend the three gunAs, freed from the bondage of karma and consequently birth & death.

Until then, however, we have to play by the rules. Think of it like a chess game. We have FREEDOM WITHIN the bounds of the game (this manifested universe/creation). We play by the rules, serve our purpose, strive to really know who we are, and then keep moving on in the journey. And in the meantime, let us hope we attract goodness from all directions.

TatTvamAsi
15 May 2010, 01:46 AM
You are absolutely right ! Unfortunately people with such mindset forget to see how much harm they are doing to Hinduism. The Hindu Society has changed a lot today due to tireless efforts of many great saints but just 200 years ago (before India's independence), it was very easy to be thrown out of Hindu society and there was no path to return back ! How stupid and how unfortunate ? On one hand Abrahimic missionaries are leaving no stone unturned to convert people & on the other we are here trying to create fissure in our own society by casteism. We are treating our own people like sub-humans in the name of caste ! This is the reason we lost hundreds of thousands of our hindu tribals to christianity. We lost another hundreds of thousands of our people to Islam and also to Buddhism.

But did we learn any lesson ? When well educated Hindus like TTA have this mentality ... how can we blame the semi-literate ignorant people who in one way or the other harming the cause of Hindutava in the world ?

The Eastern religions are the hope to save this world from going spiritually bankrupt. The spiritual seeker fed up from Christianity and Islam are trying to come to Hindu fold which is a very good sign for peace for this entire world. If we Hindus encourage them ... if we go a certain distance to help them .... we can get many such seekers. And that would create a ripple effect .... one will bring another ten and that would spread the great eastern philosophy in this world and bring peace in this world.

But alas ! What are doing here ? We are trying tooth and nail to discourage them .... "hey you are dirty" ... "you are mlechha" .... "you are avarna" etc. etc. .... is this the civilised way we learnt from our ancestors to greet our guests ? Are we really considering our guests as God as we are taught ? This is the reason that even after being so spiritually so rich we Hindus are not increasing in number but the Islam is increasing ... Buddhism is increasing (Buddhism ... which is just a tiny part of whole of Hinduism !).

And let's all remember ... my words may be ignored ... I may not be considered worthy for being given any serious thought to my words ... but let's not forget Lord Krishna's words .... hurting anyone's sentiments is hurting the God in the heart of everyone. How are we going to save ourselves from our own Karma ?

OM

Namaste Devotee,

I understand what you're saying and of course it seems like my posts are filled with casteist ideas. I am in no way like that. What I mean is, I firmly believe in doing things fervently and devoutly.

I am just very skeptical of foreigners who say they are interested in Hinduism because of my personal experiences. Not once, not twice, but several times during my adolescence and young adulthood, I have encountered these mlecchas who say, "Oh, you're Hindu! I love the "karma" and the "dharma". Tell me more!" I spent time, patiently, because I thought they were genuinely interested. Soon, they would turn around and say things like, "Have you heard of jesus christ?" "There is no hope without jesus!" And I've even been told, when I was still in high school, "Krishna is dead but "jesus is alive"!" I was about break every tooth of that lady but fear of being kicked out of school and legal problems, kept me from doing it. Repeated stabs in the heart by these hypocrites is what has made me extremely wary; some would say paranoid.

And the funny thing is, after high school, many of these 'christians' were busy fornicating, drinking alcohol, and doing illicit drugs. naturally I thought I was 'better' than them! I, to this day, don't drink, don't smoke, am strictly vegetarian, celibate, and have never done illicit drugs of any kind. I thought these things were important! Lifestyle is important! Self-discipline is important! If someone who has done drugs and all sorts of things, like the beatles band for example, suddenly becomes interested in Hinduism, you would just call them "Brahmins"? Why? Just because they show 'interest'? Upbringing, birth, lineage, and lifestyle matter right? Otherwise, the whole idea of caste system would be a joke!

I have never denigrated anyone based on caste in India. Many friends of mine in India are Indian "christians" and non-Brahmins. I've actually had only two "Brahmin" friends of my age. Our caretaker is a "pariah" but we treat him with dignity. He knows his place, we know ours. It is in harmony that is how Indian/Hindu society works. When these foreigners come into the picture, it becomes chaotic because they think they can just slide in to the top of the social/traditional ladder and we very well know they can't. Thus, only conflict arises. So there are two choices; 1.) bend the rules and accommodate like you do or 2.) keep tradition and let them know the truth.

I think it is best to let the gurus decide what to do.

And, Hinduism and Hindu society has never looked for or needed converts. If one is on a spiritual quest to find the TRUTH, then there is no need for 'conversion'. And nobody is stopping them. When these people, who are unsure of themselves, their lifestyles and traditions, want to convert to Hinduism, they bring with them their vAsanAs and ideas from their upbringing about "how things should work". They impose them on Hindus and Hindu society and due to the meek nature of Hindus, many oblige. This in turn breaks down tradition and again is cause for disturbance.

According to scriptures, birth is not accidental and you know this. yet, I am not sure why you and other liberal Hindus are so keen on hiding that fact to appease these people? Kindness is great Devotee, but being disingenuous is something else.

Namaskar.

Philippe*
15 May 2010, 04:12 AM
You people are not ready for Hinduism; you have not evolved enough...

Hate to break it to you, but, "you" don't matter at all...

Don't talk about something you have no clue about--Indian history...



Interesting, indeed. Are you reading minds ?

Tat Tvam Asi, you would be kind to keep a civil tone and avoid baseless and discriminatory ad hominem. Else I am afraid that it will be the end of the story.

Philippe

Darji
15 May 2010, 06:37 AM
Swami-ji, excuse my ignorance, but I have been sitting next to your lotus feet waiting to be told the story from the scriptures about how...


Seriously, I am trying to learn here, but I would like you to point me to the scripture that says being born outside India is karmic regression and the scripture that says foreigners can not be Hindu or incorporate Sanatana Dharma into their lives. While I respect your views, I would like to see actual scholarly proof on the subject and not angry ramblings about how we are avarna and dirty. Please I humbly request this as your servant.

I just find it hard to believe no one can become Hindu when DNA shows no less than 3 ethnic groups in India (R1a, L, H) then you have Hindus in Myanmar, Indonesia and Nepal who are different and are Hindu's. Just look at the distribution and spread of Hinduism from the Indus valley. If your argument was valid then the Dharma wouldn't have reached Dravidian Southern India it would have just sat in the Indus valley.

"I am just very skeptical of foreigners who say they are interested in Hinduism because of my personal experiences."

A HA! I knew there were some deep rooted issues! The froth boils from the pot at last. I understand that a some westerners (especially Americans) are misguided and have the attention span of a flies wing beat, but this does not mean all of us are. I am here for a real purpose that I feel in my heart, not some whim that I had after eating breakfast. I love and respect your culture, and while I do not expect you to jump for joy a little respect to me would be nice. It takes a brave person to reach into the unknown.

Eastern Mind
15 May 2010, 07:05 AM
Vannakkam all:

I think I understand TTA's viewpoint regarding westerners. Perhaps its been his karma just to meet the fools. I get frustrated with fellow westerners too.

One guy came by the temple one day, and asked me what kind of temple it was, and he said, "Oh yeah, that's the one with the porn on the temples." Then he proceeded to describe to me his own involvement with porn, until I cut him off, and went back to work.

I've been told adamantly by westerners that you can't convert.
I watched new-agers go hugging swamis - inappropriate out of context behaviour.
I saw people whine about Indian food, just being rude to guests.
One lady accused my swami of proselytysing after he gave a speech about Hinduism inside a Hindu temple to Hindus.

So yes, there are a lot of ignorant guru-hopping new-age, jump around its cool, conceited American ego nutcases out there. Obviously TTA has met a few of them. So have I.

I'm my experience, the ratio is probably about 5 nutcases to 1 sincere one. And that goes for HDF too. One of the frustrating things here is when a person asks a question, gets several answers, and then the next day says something like the same question all over again, or "BTW, I'm now interested in Buddhism."

But Darji, I also understand where you're coming from because I was there too at one time. But there afre many people besides TTA who are answering your questions. Go with them. I feel you're letting the harshness get to you, and not listening to the kinder gentler answers.

People, when introduced to others, start out with one of two basic premises: trust, or distrust. Then either they learn to trust the people they assumed they should distrust, or they learn to distrust the ones they trusted. Either that or their original impulse was correct.

After watching and reading certain responses here for a couple of years, I have had it go both ways. There are people whom I've come to disrespect, and others who I've grown to like after the initial reaction. It takes time to figure things out. And we all have lots of that.

Aum Namasivaya

Darji
15 May 2010, 07:27 AM
But there afre many people besides TTA who are answering your questions. Go with them. I feel you're letting the harshness get to you, and not listening to the kinder gentler answers.


I am listening and learning, and my path to our Lord is becoming much more clear thanks to the help of you and many others here. I do take everything that they say, meditate on it and put it into practice, so there is no distraction from my journey on TatTs account. I am merely interested in his anti-western views and would like to see scriptures that support his view, I have seen scriptures supporting the general view that westerners with pure hearts are welcome, but not the texts that say the opposite which TatT and some others here hold true. In order to truly understand you must see all sides.

My journey will not end, and I will be here until the forum goes away or Satay kicks me.

Darji
15 May 2010, 07:37 AM
p.s.

I think my fascination with TatT's view is the fact I have been around Sanatana Dharma all my life. Like I said in my introduction one of my first memories is of a Ganesha painting. Does this make me a Hindu? absolutely not, but it was a major influence in my life. Which leads me to my point, I have had the pleasure of knowing many Hindus in my life, they all were open and welcoming, so I guess I'm a little taken back by the views expressed by a few people here as it is contrary to the views of all the Hindus I have known over my life thus far.

Ganeshprasad
15 May 2010, 04:01 PM
Pranam


I have seen scriptures supporting the general view that westerners with pure hearts are welcome, but not the texts that say the opposite which TatT and some others here hold true. In order to truly understand you must see all sides.

.

I like to know who this others are, while TTA is forthright and vocal in his opinions and has reservation about foreigners.
Did he coin the world malecha? No it exist in the Sanskrit vocabulary, why because those who eat meat are, especially those who eat cow are without doubt lowest of the low. Now consider the vast majority of westerners are, by nature meat eaters , drinks and encourages to have girlfriend, if you did not do all this it is considered there is something wrong here.
If Hindus are wary of this it not without reason.
As for scripture here is what Lord Krishna says to Arjun

idam te natapaskaya
nabhaktaya kadacana
na casusrusave vacyam
na ca mam yo 'bhyasuyati
This (knowledge) should never be spoken by you to one who is devoid of austerity, who is without devotion, who does not desire to listen, or who speaks ill of Me. (18.67)

Even today some Dharama Guru would not leave the shores of Bharat

Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
15 May 2010, 04:06 PM
Pranam all

I am done here I have said enough on Varna, no need to regurgitate over and over again , yes there has been some exception but the rule always had been Gotra, I don’t need to beat my head against a stone wall. Lord Krishna, having explained the varna established by him, in the next verse says how the karma do not bind him and in very next verse 4.15 he says

you should do your duty as the ancient did.

I shell part with this

Mahabharata Shanti parva

"Yudhishthira said, 'Thou O grandsire, art endued with wisdom and knowledge of the scriptures, with conduct and behaviour, with diverse kinds of excellent attributes, and also with years. Thou art distinguished above others by intelligence and wisdom and penances. I shall, therefore, O thou that art the foremost of all righteous men, desire to address enquiries to thee respecting Righteousness. There is not another man, O king, in all the worlds, who is worthier of being questioned on such subjects. O best of kings, how may one, if he happens to be a Kshatriya or a Vaisya or a Sudra, succeed in acquiring the status of a Brahmana? It behoveth thee to tell me the means. Is it by penances the most austere, or by religious acts, or by knowledge of the scriptures, that a person belonging to any of the three inferior orders succeeds in acquiring the status of a Brahmana? Do tell me this, O grandsire!'
"Bhishma said, 'The status of a Brahmana, O Yudhishthira, is incapable of acquisition by a person belonging to any of the three other orders. That status is the highest with respect to all creatures. Travelling through innumerable orders of existence, by undergoing repeated births, one at last, in some birth, becomes born as a Brahmana.
 
...."Bhishma continued, 'Hearing these words of his, Purandara said unto him. The status of a Brahmana, O Matanga, which thou desirest to acquire is really unattainable by thee. It is true, thou desirest to acquire it, but then it is incapable of acquisition by persons begotten on uncleansed souls. O thou of foolish understanding, thou art sure to meet with destruction if thou persistest in this pursuit. Desist, therefore, from this vain endeavour without any delay. This object of thy desire, viz., the status of a Brahmana, which is the foremost of everything, is incapable of being won by penances. Therefore, by coveting that foremost status, thou wilt incur sure destruction. One born as a Chandala can never attain to that status which is regarded as the most sacred among the deities and Asuras and human beings!'" end of quote.
 
Varna has traditionally been recognised by birth, birth again is determined by Guna and Karma, so the cycle goes on, until one decide to transcend all designation.

Jai Shree Krishna

Eastern Mind
15 May 2010, 07:28 PM
Now consider the vast majority of westerners are, by nature meat eaters , drinks and encourages to have girlfriend, if you did not do all this it is considered there is something wrong here.
If Hindus are wary of this it not without reason.


Vannakkam Ganeshprasad:

This is true of westerners indeed. But it is not the average westerner who comes and seeks out HDF. I would guess only one in a hundred thousand westerners would find this place. Firstly, he or she has an interest of some sort or wouldn't have searched and found this site. By reading a bit, he may go away just because by reading, this place was not what he was looking for.

Still, as I said before, I am truly amazed that some that get here don't do enough reading. And I must say there have been a few 'ignorant' Indians come here too.

Aum Namasivaya

yajvan
15 May 2010, 07:54 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

TTA offers us the following:

The system was, is, and always will be perfect. Otherwise, we'd be practicing something manmade and imperfect! Varnashrama Dharma is from the Lord! Thus, there are no imperfections.



Ganeshprasad offers something simular in post #196 above to what I wish to pursue here if I may.

Kṛṣṇa-ji informs us in Chapter 3, 4th śloka, niyataṁ kuru karma tvaṁ¹ - do your allotted/perscribed duty. This is the wisdom offered on varṇa (class of men , tribe , order , caste ) that includes dharma at its root dhṛ ( to uphold, support).

Dharma is that which upholds and includes one's allotted duty. But what is the allotted,established, settled (niyataṁ) Kṛṣṇa-ji is talking about? It is one's actions one was born to do; those natural actions according to ones own dharma - that which upholds ( dhṛ ).

But yajvan you continue to speak of this dhṛ , can you be more specific? Let me offer what I was taught. This notion of that which upholds are those actions that allows, supports, helps one evolve, survive and nurture abundance in their immediate environment ( self, family, friends community) and at the same time are still in concert with the natural laws found in creation. It is one's right-ness of actions.

How can you tell this right-ness? My teacher has said it is those actions that minimizes stress-and-strain, excessive effort and obstructions. There is a minimum burden to one's life, surroundings and environment as they maintain life and continue to unfold spiritually.

In older days the son usually followed the same occupation as did his father... way so? It was easy do to. This fulfills the 'minimum stress'
approach for one's allotted duty ( niyataṁkuru karma tvaṁ ) . But why ? So one would have more time for their spiritual pursuits.

Learning from father or mother was at home and grooming occurred. Then additional learning could also proceed. It was a simple approach that was effective and whole.
This even occurred in the West :eek: - the blacksmith's son, become the black smith. The store keeper's son or daughter became the owner of the store. We can see the beauty here ? This at its root is the varṇa system in use.
Now we fast forward to modern times and the co-mingling of Families, occupations, technology, training and the like occurred. No clear line of sight to one's varṇa ( in the West) was easily in view. Add in ambition and the desire to move up - people left the family businesses or core competencies and pursed their own line of work, faith, etc.

Many people even today say why am I here a.k.a. - What is my allotted duty ? What am i hear for? One may be successful in a career
but bankrupt spiritually. Many may critise the varṇa system yet the the design is an ideal approach to offer one the fullness in life. That of one's duty, occupation, and spiritual growth.

This is the Wisdom of Kṛṣṇa-ji and the Indian point of view. One may argue - we would not have the same level of technological progress in the world, or medial advancements. This I do not know, but I do know all those things still have not produced a harmonious and healthy society as yet.

praṇām

words

niyataṁkuru karma tvaṁ
niyataṁ - fixed , established , settled , sure , regular , invariable , positive ; disciplined , self-governed
kuru - here it is being used as doer; this would is very robust and can take us all the way the ancestor of both pāṇḍu and dhṛtarāṣṭra, not to mention the battlefield kurukṣetra.
karma - is karman which is act , action , performance, business
tvaṁ - your, thy

devotee
15 May 2010, 08:00 PM
Did he coin the world malecha? No it exist in the Sanskrit vocabulary, why because those who eat meat are, especially those who eat cow are without doubt lowest of the low.

There are many words in Sanskrit but it is not necessary that all are civil and we should we use them without discrimination.


As for scripture here is what Lord Krishna says to Arjun

idam te natapaskaya
nabhaktaya kadacana
na casusrusave vacyam
na ca mam yo 'bhyasuyati
This (knowledge) should never be spoken by you to one who is devoid of austerity, who is without devotion, who does not desire to listen, or who speaks ill of Me. (18.67)

Does it talk of Malechha or does it apply to all without any discrimination on the basis of caste, race or region ?



Even today some Dharama Guru would not leave the shores of Bharat


But it was the order of some great Dharma Gurus only which resulted in spread of Hinduism outside India by some of our great saints. One among them is Deathless Babaji who specifically told to his disciples that there were many real Truth Seekers outside India & it was the duty of Saints from India to go there & help them.

OM

devotee
15 May 2010, 11:01 PM
Those who are interested, can refer to post No. 34 of this thread which makes it clear that "Varna by birth" theory has no support from Shruti (which is the highest authority for all Hindus) and many other scriptures.
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5491&page=4 .

Vajrsashoochika Upanishad (which is Shruti) categorically states that Brahmanhood is not attained by birth alone.

OM

MahaHrada
16 May 2010, 08:42 AM
The society based on Jati and Varna, though the classification is first of all based on birth never was rigid and without downward and upward mobility, and birth was not the only qualification just the natural primary clasification. Conduct and acts where and are of higher importance. Jati and Varna never was completly static and also the same rules were not applied everywhere by all alike. It is very easy to loose Brahmin status for a born Brahmin. He must spent effort maintaining it by showing good conduct:

"The boon giving Brahma, while he created all creatures, himself said that the distribution of human beings into the four orders dependent on birth is only for purposes of classification. The Brahmana who wishes to achieve his own good should always adhere to the path of righteousness. He should always be devoted to the study of the Vedas, but he should never derive the means of sustenance from such study."

Anusasana Parva, Section CXLIII

Good conduct can also cause upward mobility:

"Even a Sudra that has purified his soul by pure deeds and that has subjugated all his senses, deserves to be waited upon and served with reverence as a Brahmana.. This has been said by the Self-born Brahman Himself. When a pious nature and pious deeds are noticeable in even a Sudra, he should be held superior to a person of the three regenerate classes. Neither birth, nor the purificatory rites, nor learning, nor offspring, can be regarded as grounds for conferring upon one the regenerate status. Verily conduct is the only ground.

All Brahmanas in this world are Brahmanas in consequence of conduct. A Sudra, if he is established on good conduct, is regarded as possessed of the status of a Brahmana. The status of a Brahmana is equal wherever it exists. He, indeed, is a Brahmana in whom the status of Brahma exists; that condition which is bereft of attributes and which has no stain attached to it."

Anusasana Parva, Section CXLIII


But we should keep in mind that upward mobility is possible but rarely happens in real life, because overall humans tend to stick to the lifestyle and upbringing, and are satisfied when remaining within their own class and clan.

This is true for any society, whether it is professsing to be egalitarin and merit based, or based on birth and community.According to a sociological study i recently read people in Europe have very little upward class or caste mobility, ironically much less of it exists in Europe than in India despite all the claims of equality.

In the west very rarely you will see academics, or higher class people so much as to even interact with the working class, all the egalitarian ideas are only that: ideas , sweet lies, in reality no higher class people will marry or invite working class people privately, neither will working class people invite academics or higher class people in their home.

Varna and jati is a societal system in India and has very little impact on the spiritual path so i do not understand for what reason a westerner wants to feel he belongs to a varna, or tries to bash Indian society because Varna exists, probably the reason is some sort of greed and discontent with their natural state? Probably some people cannot stand the fact that there is something in this world they cannot buy, or they cannot own, no matter how hard they try? Lets say you have acquired a "Varna"? What will you do with it once you "own" it, when you don´t live in India and you are not part of a hindu family? One cannot become a bird and fly just by dressing up in feathers and run around flapping with the arms.

Kabir wrote:

candâ jhalkai yahi ghat mâhîn

The moon shines in my body, but my blind eyes cannot see it:
The moon is within me, and so is the sun.

The unstruck drum of Eternity is sounded within me; but my deaf ears cannot hear it.

So long as man clamours for the I and the Mine, his works are as naught:
When all love of the I and the Mine is dead, then the work of the Lord is done.

For work has no other aim than the getting of knowledge:
When that comes, then work is put away.

The flower blooms for the fruit: when the fruit comes, the flower withers.
The musk is in the deer, but it seeks it not within itself: it wanders in quest of grass.

Ganeshprasad
16 May 2010, 09:10 AM
Pranam EM


Vannakkam Ganeshprasad:

This is true of westerners indeed. But it is not the average westerner who comes and seeks out HDF. I would guess only one in a hundred thousand westerners would find this place. Firstly, he or she has an interest of some sort or wouldn't have searched and found this site. By reading a bit, he may go away just because by reading, this place was not what he was looking for.

Still, as I said before, I am truly amazed that some that get here don't do enough reading. And I must say there have been a few 'ignorant' Indians come here too.

Aum Namasivaya


But then that above average person should not be perturbed by the use of the word malechha, only if the cap fits.

lets face it we are all, or at least I am ignorant or else I would not be stuck in this place called duhkhalayam asasvatam a place of miseries; and temporary.

If someone interest falters at first hurdle then he can not be very serious because we know to follow Dharma is not bed of roses, a true Guru will test the sisya’s resolve to the hilt.


TTA and some others do not mince their words, so what ? only good can come out of it, it is a reminder for us to become humble, our ego get bruised but then it is our ego we need to over come.

I live in a country where I am constantly reminded that I do not belong here, so should I quit because someone do not like me?

Aum Namasivaya
Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
16 May 2010, 09:16 AM
Pranam Devotee ji


There are many words in Sanskrit but it is not necessary that all are civil and we should we use them without discrimination.
OM

Who said we should not use our discrimination, are you suggesting I used that word without qualifying it?
Do you think our ancestors were wrong, to call those outside of Bharat barbarians malechha, did they not have a reason to do so?
 
Quote:
As for scripture here is what Lord Krishna says to Arjun
 


Does it talk of Malechha or does it apply to all without any discrimination on the basis of caste, race or region ?

of course it applies to all but by default it includes Malechha and since Darji was looking for proof I quoted it!
 
 


But it was the order of some great Dharma Gurus only which resulted in spread of Hinduism outside India by some of our great saints. One among them is Deathless Babaji who specifically told to his disciples that there were many real Truth Seekers outside India & it was the duty of Saints from India to go there & help them.
OM

Here we have a different take, I would love to see Hindu Dharma strive and become pristine to it’s glorious past. I am of firm belief that Dharma is not something to spread or to swell the numbers but it is something to imbibe in ones life, let us become a perfect example for others to follow or some one to inquire about.

but we should not want to just promote our institute for material benefit which is what it has become in the west, a big money spinning org. more often then not bringing disrepute the Hindu Dharma.

Krishna says one should approach a tatvadarsi who knows the truth, serve him and ask questions, instead we see Gurus springing from everywhere charging huge sums to unsuspecting disciples who themselves probably are looking for quick fix, instant nirvana and are parting with their money , hardly Hindu Dharma.

You don’t see Four Sankracharyas of today, going out to seek converts do you?

Jai Shree Krishna

Eastern Mind
16 May 2010, 09:23 AM
Pranam EM


But then that above average person should not be perturbed by the use of the word malechha, only if the cap fits.

lets face it we are all, or at least I am ignorant or else I would not be stuck in this place called duhkhalayam asasvatam a place of miseries; and temporary.

If someone interest falters at first hurdle then he can not be very serious because we know to follow Dharma is not bed of roses, a true Guru will test the sisya’s resolve to the hilt.


TTA and some others do not mince their words, so what ? only good can come out of it, it is a reminder for us to become humble, our ego get bruised but then it is our ego we need to over come.

I live in a country where I am constantly reminded that I do not belong here, so should I quit because someone do not like me?

Aum Namasivaya
Jai Shree Krishna

Vannakkam:

I totally agree.

Aum Namasivaya

yajvan
16 May 2010, 07:47 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


If we are talking varṇa from the Bhāgavad gītā, it seems to make sense to look to its parent book the Mahābhārata for some additional insights.

If we look to the śanti parva, section 297, parāśara-muni¹ is talking to King janaka ( as narrated by bhīṣma-ji to yudhiṣṭhira )
about various varṇa subject matter and says the following:
Listen to me child and and I will tell you what is the common duties of all 4 orders (varṇa-s). Compassion, abstention from injury,
heedfulness, giving to others what is due to them, śraddhā¹ in honor of the deceased ancestors, hospitality to guests, truthfulness,
subjugation of wrath, contentedness with one's own wives, purity, freedom from malice, knowledge of the Self and renunciation -
these duties O' king are common to all the orders.

I think this is quite insightful - the pursuit of the SELF by all orders, not to mention the other directives parāśara-muni offers.

Yet there is more... King Janaka asks a brilliant question - He says to parāśara-muni, O' great one is man stained by his acts or is
he stained by the order or class in which he is born?. A doubt has arisen in my mind, please expound this to me.
parāśara-muni says both acts and birth are sources of demerit. Yet there is more to this and we can take this up on the next post.

praṇām

words

parāśara was the father of veda vyāsa वेद व्यास, the one who compiled the veda-s, or Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana ;
parāśara is a renouned ṛṣi found in the ṛg veda, and is also the author of the Bṛhat Parāśara Horāśāstra ( science of jyotiṣh)
bhīṣma भीष्म - terrible, efferent , fearful; bhīṣma's (beesh-mah) other names are Devavrata, Gangadatta and Dyu. He is one of the 8 Vasus, the celestials. How did he come to this earth and what was the circumstances? More can be found at this HDF post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1882 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1882)
śraddhā - faith , respect , reverence ; trust , confidence , trustfulness , faithfulness , belief

yajvan
17 May 2010, 10:34 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


parāśara-muni says both acts and birth are sources of demerit

Then he ( parāśara-ji ) says listen to their difference. The man who, though stained by birth yet does not commit sin,
he abstains from sin while acting; if however a person of superior birth pursues censurable acts, such acts stain him (her). Hence of the 2, acts stain a man more then birth.

Parāśara-muni in the previous paragraph says, brāhmaṇa-s learned in the veda-s regard a virtuous sudra as an equal to
a brāhmaṇa himself. I myself says parāśara-ji look upon a virtuous sudra as the effulgent viṣṇu, the foremost one of all the worlds.

What does this tell me? It is one's choice of actions in this life that are of critical import. One may be born into a noble family, and
this comes from past actions, but now one is responsible in this life for the sections that are made.
Is that person still a brāhmaṇa if despicable deeds are part of his actions? Is the person still a sudra who does righteous actions day-in and day-out? These ideas can be found in the Mahābhārata.

praṇām

atanu
18 May 2010, 01:13 AM
hariḥ oṁ

What does this tell me? It is one's choice of actions in this life that are of critical import. One may be born into a noble family, and
this comes from past actions, but now one is responsible in this life for the sections that are made.

Is that person still a brāhmaṇa if despicable deeds are part of his actions? Is the person still a sudra who does righteous actions day-in and day-out? These ideas can be found in the Mahābhārata.

praṇām

Namaste Yajvanji

Thanks for two good posts above. As questions and not as answers, I wish to put the following for consideration of meditative HDFites:

1. Whether time (past and future) flows from the present or whether these flow from the past? (IMO, actually the past and history etc. have no basis without the Self who is present).

2. Whether the categories create Self or the categories are because of the Self?

Om namah Shivaya

kd gupta
18 May 2010, 11:32 PM
Illustrating the name of Janakji is quite right about Varna system . Rishi Dhaumya also referred janak for teaching gita to yudhishter .Krsn says janakadayah . Goswamiji writes that janak says to his daughter Sita…Putri pavitra kiye KUL dou. Here Kuldharmah as stated by Arjun is quite important to discuss varna as varna is related to kul and kul is gunkarm vibhagyoh . If we take rigveda it categorizes , five varna plus one yajna doer and second yajna knower say rishi . Here it is to be noticed that the female has been kept beyond and above all varnas . Krsn says about narah and not for nari . Also stribhih narah , means male and female . In the current situation a female can drag swami from Brahmin varna to nishad and also KHAJOOR from kshatriya varna to nishad varna . May be gayatri mata or padmavati mata every female god is keeping the Hindus one . Of course naming more matas is beyond shashtram pramanam . ;)

TatTvamAsi
21 May 2010, 01:54 PM
Interesting, indeed. Are you reading minds ?

Tat Tvam Asi, you would be kind to keep a civil tone and avoid baseless and discriminatory ad hominem. Else I am afraid that it will be the end of the story.

Philippe

It is interesting to see that you didn't understand my post at all. The reason I put "you" in quotes is to emphasize INDIVIDUALITY. The exact reason you took that as ad hominem is why I think westerners should stay away from Sanatana Dharma.

"End of the story?" What story? Or is that a poorly worded threat? :rolleyes:

TatTvamAsi
21 May 2010, 01:59 PM
A HA! I knew there were some deep rooted issues! The froth boils from the pot at last. I understand that a some westerners (especially Americans) are misguided and have the attention span of a flies wing beat, but this does not mean all of us are. I am here for a real purpose that I feel in my heart, not some whim that I had after eating breakfast. I love and respect your culture, and while I do not expect you to jump for joy a little respect to me would be nice. It takes a brave person to reach into the unknown.

My experiences with christians and others who claimed to be interested in Hinduism merely proved what I was warned about; that many of these people are deceiving and out to convert you and are not really interested in Dharma.

However, I agree that if you are truly genuine in your interest in Hinduism, do all the research you can. Travel to India and find out for yourself instead of going by what others say. As I said before, I cannot divine your intentions but I sure as hell hope they are pure and not to plant discord in Indian/Hindu society like the "missionary" scum.

Regarding importance of birth and caste, you, and other westerners, need to read what Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati of Sankara Math has written. He was an official guru in the lineage of Adi Sankaracharya and is a Vipra Brahmana.

Here is his explanation of the oh-so-sensitive topic:

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap2.htm

devotee
22 May 2010, 05:16 AM
Regarding importance of birth and caste, you, and other westerners, need to read what Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati of Sankara Math has written. He was an official guru in the lineage of Adi Sankaracharya and is a Vipra Brahmana.

Here is his explanation of the oh-so-sensitive topic:

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap2.htm

With all due respect to Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati, he can't be considered greater than Lord Himself and I don't find him speaking the truth in his follwing assertion in the book. It appears as if he is fully unaware of the realities of life.


It is jatidharma that goes to make the inner guna (inner quality or nature) of an individual. So Sri Krsna's dictum in the Gita that the caturvana division is in accord with the gunas and the idea that the caste is based on birth are one and the same. There is no conflict between the two. You cannot find fault with Sri Krsna for his practice being at variance with his precept.
Parasurama and Dronacarya were Brahmins but they were Ksatriyas by nature. On the other hand, Visvamitra, a valorous Ksatriya king known for his violent and passionate temperament, became a Brahmin rsi. Cases like this are extremely rare, and are exceptions to the rule of jati dharma. On the whole we see that the Lord functions on the basis that, whatever be the outward qualities of individuals, their inner
quality is in keeping with their hereditary vocations.

His above argument is not based on reality.

OM

TatTvamAsi
22 May 2010, 01:19 PM
With all due respect to Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati, he can't be considered greater than Lord Himself and I don't find him speaking the truth in his follwing assertion in the book. It appears as if he is fully unaware of the realities of life.

Devotee,

I would have never thought you would say such a thing!

Are you aware of the realities more than he was? Among us, all of whom are unrealized, Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati has far more knowledge than all of us combined.

To discredit him is to discredit Adi Sankara's works.

Ganeshprasad
22 May 2010, 02:34 PM
Pranam Devotee ji



Parasurama and Dronacarya were Brahmins but they were Ksatriyas by nature. On the other hand, Visvamitra, a valorous Ksatriya king known for his violent and passionate temperament, became a Brahmin rsi. Cases like this are extremely rare, and are exceptions to the rule of jati dharma. On the whole we see that the Lord functions on the basis that, whatever be the outward qualities of individuals, their inner
quality is in keeping with their hereditary vocations.







His above argument is not based on reality.

OM

Perhaps you can tell us what is false in the above statement?

Jai Shree Krishna

Philippe*
22 May 2010, 05:44 PM
It is interesting to see that you didn't understand my post at all. The reason I put "you" in quotes is to emphasize INDIVIDUALITY. The exact reason you took that as ad hominem is why I think westerners should stay away from Sanatana Dharma.

"End of the story?" What story? Or is that a poorly worded threat? :rolleyes:

Namaste TatTvamAsi,

Practically it means that you are put in the ignore list for an indefinite time.

All the best,

Philippe

yajvan
22 May 2010, 06:21 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté TTA

The exact reason you took that as ad hominem is why I think westerners should stay away from Sanatana Dharma.
This subject has been contentious here on HDF over the years , and I am not here to fan the flames.

IMHO a Hindu comes from birth, and not from proclamation. Why so? Hindu as I understand it was originally a secular term used to depict all the inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent (or Hindustan) irrespective of their religious affiliation. It seems straight forward to consider one is a Hindu if from Hindustan.

Yet it is my firm belief that one can practice and assimilate sanātana dharma even if not aboriginal to India. It is universal by nature and we are blessed as a people that India and those of Hindustan have carried sanātana dharma for all to view, consider and practice. For this we are indebited World-wide to the effort and the compassion of the Indian people to be patient with the rest of the world to catch up.

praṇām

saidevo
23 May 2010, 01:21 AM
namaste Isavasya.



yes If you are saying some things are better learnt from childhood I will agree for part of karmakanda, but mimamsa is dead a long time ago. How many srauta brahmins are alive today ? Do you know duties of brahmana , what should be their occupation? Daily routines? People working in Infosys, wipro, multinational companies and earning like vaishya or sudra are not brahmana sir. Please know that brahmanas engaging in these professions are taken below sudra according to shastra. How many brahmins today do yagna, havana daily for world peace. Do brahmins have fire burning in their homes ?There are above 6 crores brahmins in india, how many of them follow the prescribed duties, yet you take them to be brahmin, and even their next generation. I on the contrary, have opinion that those who show and practice brahmanical qualities are brahmins, kashtriye qualities are kshatriye and so on.


01. In the olden days, it was the responsibility of the King to ensure that everyone conformed to his varNa. The Dharma ShAstras and other texts gave the authority to the King to punish those who swerved out of their varNa and cast them into the avarNa group, for a certain period or even permanently. If such a system existed today, brahmins would definitely follow their varNa with vigour and dedication.

02. In the society of our olden days, brahmins were supported for their living by the other varNas, so they had no necessity or reason to worry about the three basic necessities of life--food, clothes and shelter--and devote their entire time to the varNa dharma. Even some fifty or sixty years back, some brahmin families in villages subsisted on unja-vritti--getting alms of rice for cooking. And today, most of the brahmin families in villages whose breadwinners are temple priests, live in poverty, with no scope to give their children competitive worldly education.

03. Since a person's guNa-karma decides the birth which in turn decides the varNa, even in the olden days, some of the brAhmaNas practised the occupations of other varNas and excelled in them: Sage drONAchArya is a classic example, and there were many other examples detailed in my post http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=43232&postcount=6 . This shows that although the King had the responsibility to regulate varNa dharma, he also had the discretion to recognize and promote deserving cases, based on their skills and social acceptability.

04. Again in the olden days, all the three varNas--brAhmaNas, kShatriyas and vyshyas--were initiated as dvijas by the upanayanam ceremony and sent to the gurukulam for studying the Vedas (although it was mostly brahmins who chanted the Vedas in rituals). The shUdras were exempted because Vedic Sanskrit was not their mother tongue and they had no time for such endeavours.

In the totally changed circumstances today,

• How many people from the kShatriya and vyshya varNa wear the holy thread they are eligible to, and are willing to take up the study of Vedas?

• Although politicians would make the world believe that the shUdras are not allowed to study the Vedas, how many of the shUdras have the real inclination and preference towards it, when even the brahmins whose occupation it is, struggle to make both ends meet in their daily life?

• The objective of the politicians is to destroy Hindu Dharma, not just the varNa. Since they can't give logical reasoning for abolition of varNa and caste, which system is in fact a guardian of Hindu Dharma, they declare themselves as atheists and secularists to the public and attack Hinduism.

Had it not been for Gandhiji, India would have been a Hindu nation, and would have preserved the time-honoured varNa and caste system which has distinctions with explicit strictures against discrimination. Such distinction with utmost discrimination does exist in all forms of hierarchical systems in public and private life of the modern society, and this is because of the human guNa-karma and ego.

devotee
23 May 2010, 01:46 AM
Namaste TTA,



I would have never thought you would say such a thing!

I think you should have thought that. :) I can't see any truth seeker being humilated or hurt .... & be a passive onlooker.


Are you aware of the realities more than he was?

Yes, if he is not even aware who Rishi Parashar, Maharishi Vyas, Saint Ravidas, Meerabai, Swami Vivekananda, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Sri Aurobindo etc. were. None of these saints were Brahmins. Why Lord Krishna, a vaisya by birth, taught like a brahmin and fought like a kshatriya ? Didn't he violate his Jati-dharma ? Or should Lord Krishna have taken lessons from Swami ji & acted as per his Jati-dharma as he advocates ?

Yes, if he doesn't know that in Indian Army the best of our warriors come from all classes in Hindu society and very few of them are Kshatriya by birth.

Yes, if he is unaware that there are many so-called Brahmins (the number is in hundreds of thousands) who indulge in drinking, are not aware of the Vedas, eat meat (even beef) and even go to the prostitutes. On the other hand, there are many so-called Sudras who are truthful, have deep knowledge of the scriptures and have immpecable, taintless character. Who should be called Brahmin here ?

Yes, if he is not aware that Vajrashoochika Upanishad does not give credence to Varna by birth theory.

Swami ji has given his own opinion about what Lord says in BG. It has its value limited to being that alone ... i.e. an opinion. He doesn't become Lord Krishna Himself !


To discredit him is to discredit Adi Sankara's works.

That is what you think. I don't want to argue over all your self-made opinions.

OM

Ganeshprasad
23 May 2010, 03:43 AM
Pranam all


Why Lord Krishna, a vaisya by birth, taught like a brahmin and fought like a kshatriya ? Didn't he violate his Jati-dharma ? Or should Lord Krishna have taken lessons from Swami ji & acted as per his Jati-dharma as he advocates ?

For the record Lord Krishna was born off Vasudev and Devki and they certainly were not Vaisya
and while we are at it Vyasdev the son off Parasar we can trace their Gotra to Vasistha, these are rare personality with extraordinary birth.

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
23 May 2010, 06:26 AM
Namaste Ganeshprasad ji,

The kingdom of Surasena was the native kingdom of Yadava clans constituted by the Andhakas, Vrishnis and Bhojas. Its ruler was Kamsa, the brother of Devaki. Devaki and Vasudeva both were Yadvas.

So, Krishna was a Yadava by birth. He was a prince, no doubt, but a Yadava Prince. It is not that only the Kshatriyas were kings in those times. In fact, a number of great kings of India were not Kshatriyas e.g. the Nandas (Barber, Sudra), the Mauryas (the peacock tamers, Sudras), the Guptas (Vaisyas) etc.

For the caste of Maharishi Parashar and Maharishi Vedvyas ... please note that they were Sudras (Nishads). The father of Maharishi Parashar was a Brahmin but his mother was from Chaandaala caste. So, in accordance with Manu Smriti, Maharishi Parashar was a Sudra by birth. Similarly, Maharishi Vedvyas was born to Maharishi Parashar (a Sudra) and Satyavati (Nishad, a Sudra woman). So, by birth, Maharishi Vedvyas was a Sudra. You can refer to Laws of Manu to verify what I am saying.

OM

Ganeshprasad
23 May 2010, 08:49 AM
Pranam Devotee ji

As far as i know Yadavas were Kshatriya and i have yet to read anything different. here is a link that may be of interest.
http://www.xomba.com/the_history_of_the_abhirs_and_yadavas_of_ancient_bharat_varse_2

As for Parasar a Sudra that is news to me, do provide any avidence from Shastra where he may have been described as such.
If it is an opinion then i do not have to worry about that. It would be nice, were you to quote relevent Manu's Laws instead of me having to search for it.

As far as i know Gotra is passed on from Father to son. do let us know if you know any different. i also have read sometime ago that a Brahmin male could marry a lower varna but it is forbiden for brahmin girl to marry a lower varna.i will have to brush on this so dont take my word for it.

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
23 May 2010, 11:47 AM
Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,

This is the law of Manu from Manusmriti which decides the castes of offsprings born to a Brahmin father and Vaishya/Sudra mother :

10.8. From a Brahmana, with the daughter of a Vaisya is born (a son) called an Ambashtha, with the daughter of a sudra a Nishada, who is also called Parasava.

In accordance with the above law of Manu, Maharishi Parashar, Maharishi Vedvyas and entire clan of Kauravas and Pandavas were actually sudra by birth.

Coming to your assertion that Yadavas were actually Kashtriyas ... I am not surprised at all ! The link that you have given has been written by the Yadavas & so you also can doubt that it is colored by their vested interests. Such claims have been made by various castes in the past to elevate their status within social structure whenever they came to power.

I am giving you a list of some of the castes (which were originally Vaisyas or Sudras) which claimed Kashtriya status when they came to power :

a) Gurjars (tribe/outside Hindu caste system)
b) Khatris (Vaisyas in trading business)
c) Kurmis (Vaisyas in cultivation)
d) Mauryas (Sudra in peacock taming)
e) Kukhrans (Vaisya)
f) Bhatis (Vaisyas)
g) Nairs (Vaisyas )
h) Dhangars (Sudra)

However these castes are not accepted as Kshatriyas but as pseudo-kshatriyas. You can very well check their cedentials as these castes are there in our society. The same goes for the Yadavas.

It is a simple test to judge which caste can claim to be in which varna : Ask this question : what is the occupation of the caste ? Yadvas keep cows, they trade in milk and milk products .... so how can they be Kshatriyas ? Lord Krishna says in BG that those keeping cows and doing business are Vaisyas.

The Non-Indians as Kshatriyas :

The story of the kshatriyas doesn't end here. Manusmriti and other scriptures tell us that the Shakas, the Kushans, the Indo-greeks, the Hunds, the Parthians, the yavanas, the Kambojas who were invading tribes from outside India were granted Kshatriya status within Hinduism as they were the rulers in their times.

You may believe whatever you want to believe. I have no issues with that. OM

Darji
23 May 2010, 02:09 PM
I think we should end this here with everyone agreeing to disagree. There are many many instances where foreigners, whether invading and occupying given Kshatrya status, and the early "sailors" visiting were considered sudra and the later traders were considered Vaisya. So in the past foreigners were classified and given varna.

My whole argument has not been against varna, rather for it, it's a part of the religion as put forth by Lord Krishna. As such, I feel in order to be a part of the religion to its fullest, give us whiteys purification and welcome us into the fold of varna, whether by profession, by birth or by family history. I have no qualms with this.

Lastly, I love everyone here, and we really shouldn't be arguing over this. There are a lot more important things to discuss. Let's be proactive and instead of talking about us whiteys as filth because of our avarna, lets figure out how us mlecchas can be brought into the full and loving embrace of the Lord.

D

Ganeshprasad
23 May 2010, 02:40 PM
Pranam Devotee ji
Thanks for the quote, it becomes interesting, having read the laws off Manu it increasing reinforce the birth criteria. The quote you have sited reinforces Arjun’s fear of Varnashankar. Yes I would agree intercaste marriages would dilute the varnas and that has what happened.

But your assertion that Parasar and Vyasdev were sudra and thus Pandavas and Kaurvas were sudra are false on two counts one Parsarmuni is a rare personality, grandson of Vashista who dint of his yogic power rendered Satvati a vergin, not an ordinary soul, two none off the Pandavas were sudra and no one in the history have declared as such, by the recognition of their royal birth they were Kshatriya and there was no other criteria. even the birth Dhitrastra, Pandu and Vidurji are divine. Their apparent birth in royal family and in the case of Vidur, Dasiputra is their only pahechan (recognition).

You have your right to believe as you do, unfortunately there is no meeting of mind here, that’s not a problem, Hindu dharma has come a long way and has survived brutal occupation by two different ideology, the Varnashram Dharma the only authority that sustained it, it is a pity people want to blame it for all the ills of India that is today.

This is it for time being on the subject, I have to prepare for my next pilgrimage.

Jai Shree Krishna

PS. Darji ji I have no problem anyone taking up Sanatan Dharma, as such no need for Varna just be a good sanatani.

Jai Shree Krishna

satay
24 May 2010, 07:01 AM
namaste Darji,


My whole argument has not been against varna, rather for it, it's a part of the religion as put forth by Lord Krishna. As such, I feel in order to be a part of the religion to its fullest, give us whiteys purification and welcome us into the fold of varna, whether by profession, by birth or by family history. I have no qualms with this.

D

Non-Indian hindus have been welcomed in the varna ashram by adopting the gotra of their guru. I know of many western hindus who are now part of hindu varna dharma. Their varna is the varna of their guru.

Just like a son rightfully takes on the varna of his father at birth so does a non-indian hindu, having been born twice, takes on the varna of his guru and thus adopts the gotra of his guru. With the blessing of his guru he is able to use the gotra for all intents and purposes i.e. for yagya, puja, marriage etc.

HDF's own Sarabhanga, a westerner by birth was accepted in juna akhara of nagas. He rightfully took on varna and gotra (giri) of his guru. Baba Ram puri is a similar case (look him up http://rampuri.com/ bom bom bhole!). http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/archive/index.php?t-1645.html

There are many such cases...

satay
24 May 2010, 07:14 AM
namaste devotee,

What you are saying here is very interesting. I have never heard of such a thing that kurus and pandvas were non-Kashtriyas and sudra by birth!!

Are you the only one hindu with this opinion? Honestly, no where in indian literature I have read such a thing.

S.N. dasgupta in his Indian philosophy volume I mentions clearly that Arjuna was a kashtriya by birth. This seems to have been accepted by all in Indian scholars from ramkrishnan to aurobindo. Even political leaders like gandhi and vivek didn't question the birth of arjuna.

Another interesting thing you say here is that some jatis elevated their status to higher status and they are some sort of pseudo-Kashtriyas yet in the next paragraphs you say that non-indians were accepted as kashtriayas.

By your theory, Alexander the great was a kashtriaya and Arjuna and Krishna himself were sudra!

With all due respect, that must the most ridiculous thing I have ever read!

Hindus don't have to come up with ridiculous theories to accept westerners in varnasharam. Westerners adopt the varna and gotra of their guru. The guru becomes their father for all intents and purposes.


Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,

This is the law of Manu from Manusmriti which decides the castes of offsprings born to a Brahmin father and Vaishya/Sudra mother :

10.8. From a Brahmana, with the daughter of a Vaisya is born (a son) called an Ambashtha, with the daughter of a sudra a Nishada, who is also called Parasava.

In accordance with the above law of Manu, Maharishi Parashar, Maharishi Vedvyas and entire clan of Kauravas and Pandavas were actually sudra by birth.

Coming to your assertion that Yadavas were actually Kashtriyas ... I am not surprised at all ! The link that you have given has been written by the Yadavas & so you also can doubt that it is colored by their vested interests. Such claims have been made by various castes in the past to elevate their status within social structure whenever they came to power.

I am giving you a list of some of the castes (which were originally Vaisyas or Sudras) which claimed Kashtriya status when they came to power :

a) Gurjars (tribe/outside Hindu caste system)
b) Khatris (Vaisyas in trading business)
c) Kurmis (Vaisyas in cultivation)
d) Mauryas (Sudra in peacock taming)
e) Kukhrans (Vaisya)
f) Bhatis (Vaisyas)
g) Nairs (Vaisyas )
h) Dhangars (Sudra)

However these castes are not accepted as Kshatriyas but as pseudo-kshatriyas. You can very well check their cedentials as these castes are there in our society. The same goes for the Yadavas.

It is a simple test to judge which caste can claim to be in which varna : Ask this question : what is the occupation of the caste ? Yadvas keep cows, they trade in milk and milk products .... so how can they be Kshatriyas ? Lord Krishna says in BG that those keeping cows and doing business are Vaisyas.

The Non-Indians as Kshatriyas :

The story of the kshatriyas doesn't end here. Manusmriti and other scriptures tell us that the Shakas, the Kushans, the Indo-greeks, the Hunds, the Parthians, the yavanas, the Kambojas who were invading tribes from outside India were granted Kshatriya status within Hinduism as they were the rulers in their times.

You may believe whatever you want to believe. I have no issues with that. OM

devotee
24 May 2010, 10:34 AM
Namaste Satay,



What you are saying here is very interesting. I have never heard of such a thing that kurus and pandvas were non-Kashtriyas and sudra by birth!!

Are you the only one hindu with this opinion? Honestly, no where in indian literature I have read such a thing.

I am not saying anything. Please see the Manusmriti's law 10.8 & decide yourself.

The law says that the child born out of a Brahmin father and Sudra mother is a Sudra (Nishad by caste). Now you apply this theory to the lineage as below and see what we get :

i) Father - Shaktimuni (Brahmin ... son of sage Vashishtha) + Mother (a Chaandala woman (I coouldn't find her name anywhere) ===> Son, Maharishi Parashar

So, Maharishi Parashar as per Manu's 10.8 is a Nishad by caste i.e. a Sudra.

ii) Father - Maharishi Parashar (a Sudra by the above deduction) + Mother (Satyavati, a Sudra) ===> Son, Vedvyas

A Sudra father and a Sudra mother will always give a Sudra child. So, Maharishi Vedyas becomes a Sudra. Even if we consider Maharishi Parashar a Brahmin, Maharishi Vedvyas cannot escape being branded as a Sudra by Manu's Law given above as his mother was a Sudra.

iii) Father - Maharishi Vedvyas ( A Sudra, as deduced above) + mother, Ambika ( a Kshatriya) ===> Son, Dhritrashtra,
Father - Maharishi Vedvyas + mother (Ambalika, a Kshatriya woman) ===> Son, Pandu
Father - Maharishi Vedvyas + mother (maidservant of Ambika, a Sudra) ===> Son, Vidura

Now in the above realtionship, as the father is a sudra ( as deduced in ii) above, all the three sons must be Sudras and then their clan cannot be anything but Sudras. Let's remember that if father or mother of an offspring is a sudra, the offspring is always a sudra as per "varna by birth" rule of Manu.

If you can find anything different by applying the above law of Manu, please let me know.

What we are missing here that Maharishi Vedvyas and Maharishi Parashar are not judged for their varna by the laws of Manu. We readily accept them as Brahmins and then everything falls into place as we are told. Why do we apply such rules selectively ? That only shows that Laws of Manu were either written or manipulated later on (much recently) & it was not originally so as we have it today. In fact, once we go back to vedic era, this varna by birth theory was never applied in deciding the varna of the sage.

Please try to see that I am trying here to show the ridiculousness of the application of "Varna by birth theory" rather then being interested in showing these sages as Sudras. If you accept the Varna by Guna and karma theory as stated by Lord Krishna in BG and in Shruti ... this problem would not arise.


Another interesting thing you say here is that some jatis elevated their status to higher status and they are some sort of pseudo-Kashtriyas yet in the next paragraphs you say that non-indians were accepted as kashtriayas.

By your theory, Alexander the great was a kashtriaya and Arjuna and Krishna himself were sudra!

What I am saying is the truth. Please read the history of the Kshatriyas and see for yourself how many castes who have their occupations of Sudras and Vaisyas have proclaimed their status as Kshatriyas. The prominent one is Mauryas. These Mauryas were actually Sudras who were engaged in taming the Peacocks but after Chandragupta Maurya they elevated themselves as Kshatriyas (the brahmins played an important role in this acceptance). This happened with Chhatrapati Shivaji too.

The Yavanas, Kambojas etc. were accepted as Kshatriyas is a fact that we know from Manusmriti itself.

BTW, where did I say that Lord Krishna was a Sudra ? He was a Vaisya, as I have stated above.


With all due respect, that must the most ridiculous thing I have ever read!
Hindus don't have to come up with ridiculous theories to accept westerners in varnasharam. Westerners adopt the varna and gotra of their guru. The guru becomes their father for all intents and purposes.

I am not pleading for westerners being adopted into Varnashrams. You have already suggested that they adopt varna and gotra of their Guru. So, I don't think there is any need for any extra effort for that.

What I am saying is written in the history of castes & also in Manusmriti. Please read the following excerpt taken from Manusmriti :

10.43. But in consequence of the omission of the sacred rites, and of their not consulting Brahmanas, the following tribes of Kshatriyas have gradually sunk in this world to the condition of Sudras;
10.44. (Viz.) the Paun-drakas, the Kodas, the Dravidas, the Kambogas, the Ya-vanas, the Sakas, the Paradas, the Pahlavas, the Kinas,the Kiratas, and the Daradas.


From the above, this conclusion should not be drawn that Alexender was a Kshatriya. No ! When the Yavana army left India, many of the yavanas settled in India and never went back to Greece. They also adopted Hindu way of life. That happened to Huns, Kambojas, Kushans etc. too. They got assimilated within Hindu society as Kshatriyas depending on their social status.

See, the caste system was based on inheritance. So, you cannot change the caste. It is decided by birth alone. However, whether a particular caste was a Kshatriya, Vaisya or Sudra was decided by the society. I have mentioned some of the castes which claim to be Kshatriyas. Let's see what their social acceptance is :

a) Yadvas : Nowhere in India they are considered Kshatriyas. They are considered Vaisyas. No Kshatriya would like to have any matrimonial relationship with the yadvas. The Yadavas themselves don't consider their caste as Kshatriya. If they would claim ... how come they ask for reservation under OBC (other backward classes) ? They conveniently choose to be Kshatriyas and backward caste vaisya depending upon what suits them in a particlar situation.

b) Mauryas : They are considered Sudras in today's society as they lost their glory long back after the downfall of Maurya empire.

c) Gurjars : This was a nomadic tribe outside Hindu caste system. However, they were good fighters and won kingdoms and thus claimed their status as Kshatriyas. But in today's society they are considered a tribe (a sudra). They are fighting intensely for getting reservation under ST quota. Why are they doing it if they consider themselves as Kshatriyas ?

d) Kurmis : I have many Kurmi friends. Mr Neetish Kumar, the present chief minister of Bihar is a Kurmi. If they consider themselves Kshatriyas, why they count themselves in OBC and enjoy reservation in that category ? Neither the today's society nor they themselves consider their caste as Kshatriya.


OM

isavasya
24 May 2010, 04:17 PM
Namaste saidevo ji, devotee ji, ganesh prasad ji satay ji and all.


Devotee ji mentioned in previous posts people are unfamiliar with realities of life. I am 100% convinced now that many people are completely unaware about realities of life. Ganesh prasaad ji mentioned yadavas as kshatriye , now for a moment let us forget scriptures and see realities of life.

In todays society they are no where accepted as ksahtriye, in fact only after mulayam yadav ,lalu yadav rose to power yadavas began to assert themselves as ksahtriye. In UP & MP they are looked down as 'ahirs' by forward castes as well as by dalits. In bihar they are called gawaar by forward castes as well as dalits. Mind you above is not my view but I am telling you what is view of society of India. As far as Gujjars are concerned they were initially kshatriye but again lost power and were displaced from kshatriye status by neo-kshatriyes like rajputs.

Now in North India Rajputs and jats are rated as kshatriyes, many people dont count jats though. At the same time there are big communities called Muslim rajputs and muslim jats. If birth decides varna system, are you ready to count muslim rajputs and muslim jats as kshatriyes too ? Dont say all of them converted by force, many of them converted because of greed of holding empires or willingly. What I want to tell is its not birth but It's karma which ultimately decides varna. Its just that being born in a particular family enhances the chance a person will follow his parents varna, provided the parents follow too. I asked a question in my previous posts there are many soldiers and policemen protecting our country and it's citizens who were not born in kshatriye family, will you not count them as kshatriye ? Don't say it is rare for people of one varna to show traits of other varna. There are innumerable vaishya,shudra and even brahmins in Indian army. Arrogantly calling many martyrs of India as shudra because they were born in such caste is the reason there is castism In Indian society, get over these things and start recognizing people by their karma as is message of sanatan dharm. After that it wont take more than 10 years before Islam and Christianity gets kicked out of India.


[As far as i know Gotra is passed on from Father to son. do let us know if you know any different. i also have read sometime ago that a Brahmin male could marry a lower varna but it is forbiden for brahmin girl to marry a lower varna.


Dear ganesh prasaad ji, Your statements can be taken by ambedkarites,periyaarists and made a weapon for anti-brahmin propaganda. Just because of these comments all brahmins or kshatriyes are leveled as racists. As far as I know it is muslims who claim, they can marry non-muslim women but non-muslims cant have muslim women. And believe me in my innumerable fights with ambedkarites, I have always encountered this charge that supposedly according to hindu dharm kshatriyes and and other upper castes have the right to marry women of dalits, but not the other way. Please consider consequences before making such arguments.




As for Parasar a Sudra that is news to me, do provide any avidence from Shastra where he may have been described as such.
If it is an opinion then i do not have to worry about that. It would be nice, were you to quote relevent Manu's Laws instead of me having to search for it.

I don't know how many innumerable examples have been given to you, smaranam ji and devotee ji gave you examples from upanishad, i also gave you examples of vedic rishis and innumerable examples from vishnu puran where people born in one varna came to be recognized in another varna, do you want me to quote them again ? Also my earnest request mahabharata may be a great book , but we should look to eternal vedas , upanishads more than anything else for coming to conclusion about such thing as varnashrama dharma. Also you had questioned devotee ji over how he can reject Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati's view, now what sort of argument is that ? I say maharshi dayanand saraswati and swami vivekananda support the view of devotee ji, How can you reject them ?





This shows that although the King had the responsibility to regulate varNa dharma, he also had the discretion to recognize and promote deserving cases, based on their skills and social acceptability.

Yes not just king whole society should encourage this, according to your argument if king is not a virtuous one chaos can ensue in society. In kaliyuga it is not rare to show traits of any varna by people born in family of a particular varna.


How many people from the kShatriya and vyshya varNa wear the holy thread they are eligible to, and are willing to take up the study of Vedas?


Well in my real life I have seen many rajputs, kayasthas, etc going through jenau sanskaar, but again the caste system has got so abused that many castes are unsure of their varna. Gujjars claim to be kshatriye but rajputs protest this status for gujjars. kayasthas rate themselves to possess dual varna of kshatriye-brahmin but they are taken as vaishya in north india and were taken as sudra in bengal till a 100 year ago. Marathas claim to be kshatriye but brahmins from maharshtra discounted them from the status, innumerable times I have heard nairs claiming to be kshatriye but namboodris not accepting and calling them shudra. Also your claim that kshatriye-vaishya are not doing enough is definitely false. There are many kayasthas, vaishyas,etc who have done much for sanatan dharm, also many mutths are now owned by non-brahmins. Many dharm gurus and dharm propagators are non-brahmins too. Please open your eyes sir.

satay
24 May 2010, 11:44 PM
namaste devotee,
 


I am not saying anything. Please see the Manusmriti's law 10.8 & decide yourself.

The law says that the child born out of a Brahmin father and Sudra mother is a Sudra (Nishad by caste). Now you apply this theory to the lineage as below and see what we get :

i) Father - Shaktimuni (Brahmin ... son of sage Vashishtha) + Mother (a Chaandala woman (I coouldn't find her name anywhere) ===> Son, Maharishi Parashar

So, Maharishi Parashar as per Manu's 10.8 is a Nishad by caste i.e. a Sudra.

ii) Father - Maharishi Parashar (a Sudra by the above deduction) + Mother (Satyavati, a Sudra) ===> Son, Vedvyas

A Sudra father and a Sudra mother will always give a Sudra child. So, Maharishi Vedyas becomes a Sudra. Even if we consider Maharishi Parashar a Brahmin, Maharishi Vedvyas cannot escape being branded as a Sudra by Manu's Law given above as his mother was a Sudra.

iii) Father - Maharishi Vedvyas ( A Sudra, as deduced above) + mother, Ambika ( a Kshatriya) ===> Son, Dhritrashtra,
Father - Maharishi Vedvyas + mother (Ambalika, a Kshatriya woman) ===> Son, Pandu
Father - Maharishi Vedvyas + mother (maidservant of Ambika, a Sudra) ===> Son, Vidura

Now in the above realtionship, as the father is a sudra ( as deduced in ii) above, all the three sons must be Sudras and then their clan cannot be anything but Sudras.


Let me begin by saying that I personally don't believe in manusmriti in the sense that I don't carry a copy of it with me and it does not lead my personal life or decisions in any way shape or form.

Now, I agree with you that applying this law 10.8 of manu results in pandu clan being sudra by birth.

However, if we include the reality of indian soceity is this what happens? Of all the intercaste marriages that I know about, the father's caste carries forward to the children. This is the case with similar caste marriages and in the cases where the father is of the higher caste.

What happens in your case? Didn't your wife carry your caste? Didn't your children? In my case, my wife is a non-indian. Even she carries my caste. My daughter carries my caste. No one stopped us from doing so citing manu.

So is this because manu is not so important and people ignore it? Could be? But the norm of indian society seems to be children accept the caste of their father.

In the west also, more or less this norm is there though I know of several couples in the west, whose children carry their mother's caste.

Just like Ganesh also mentioned that caste and gotra of the father gets passed to children is also my knowledge though I didn't consult manu for that. I just know that that's what happens. Do you not agree that that's the norm at least in Indian hindu society?

Also, coming to the birth of Arjuna and other pandavas, it was kunti their mother who used a boon given by durvasa to invoke god in order to have a child since pandu couldn't have any children due to a curse.

Kunti prayed to yama, vayu and indra and in turn three sons were born.

The third son Arjuna, is the son of Indra. So technically, pandu is not even his father. It is Indra who I trust passes the manu tests of castes and is not sudra by birth?

If we go by your theory, applying the law 10.8 of manu and declaring Arjuna a sudra by birth, then I have a few questions.

During the Gita, it is clear that both Arjuna and Krishna consider Arjuna to be a kshatriya. Why didn't one of them mention anything of his sudra status?

Couldn't they themselves apply this simple law of manu and deduce that Arjuna was actually a sudra by birth and didn't need to uphold any kshatriya dharma?

Why in Mahabharat Arjuna insults Karan calling him sutputra? Wasn't Arjuna aware of his own lower caste birth of sudra? Was he being delusional in is status or just ignorant of manu's laws?

Again, if you look at how a person's caste is decided upon i.e. by the father's caste, everything falls in place as we are told.



If you accept the Varna by Guna and karma theory as stated by Lord Krishna in BG ... this problem would not arise.

I agree with you. In fact, I haven't told anything about my position on this yet.

I do not fully agree with the anti caste scholars and my plea is that varnadharma of gita should not be judged in the light of the evils of present day caste system.

Chapter 4 shloka 13 states that guna and karma form the basis of the varna system. Shlokas 18.41-18.47, speak of the duties of each varna determined in each case by 'svabhava' i.e. nature.

So from these verses it can be seen that one's svabhava, guna and karma are the basis of one's varna but in verse 18.48, Lord uses the word, sahajam.

Literal translation of this word sahajam is 'born with'. Now, there are many inerpertations of this word and some people translate it as 'according to one's nature' but if we go by the literal translation then what?

Then is that Lord saying in 18.48 that 'one should not give up 'sahajam karma' or the duty that one is 'born with', even if it may be defective for all ?

Thus my position on the question is varna based on birth, is inconclusive. That said, if one were to twist my arm I would lean towards the answer no.

However, is caste or jati based on birth? That can clearly be said to be yes. This is based on the norm of hindu society in India. Father's caste or jati gets carried forward to children.

Finally, there are commentators like Gandhi and Vinoba who feel that varna need not represent a weak point for the Gita even if varna or caste or jati was determined by birth.

According to Gandhi, "Among the saints of revered memory, Sena was a barber, Sajana was a butcher, Gora a potter, Raidas a cobbler, Chokhamala an untouchable, Tukaram a kumbi and so on. None disclaimed his hereditary function but worked his salvation through detached prayerful performance of it." [The Gospel of Selfless Action]

Similary, Vinoba argues that when a man gives up his ancestral trade and takes up a new job, so many years are wasted in learning the new job. [Talks on Gita]

I leave this thread with this interesting quote from Vivekanada.

"In modern times we all know that every child brings with him all the past, not only of humanity, but of the plant life... Everyone has his path mapped and sketched and planned out for him...It is the universal chain of cause and effect, you receiving one link, one part, I another...and that part is our own nature. Now Sri Krsna says, 'Better die in your own path than attempt the path of another.' This is my path, and I am down here. And you are way up there, and I am always tempted to give up my path, thinking I will go there and be with you. And if I go up, I am neither there no here. We must not lose sight of this doctrine. It is all a matter of growth. Wait and grow, and you attain everything; otherwise there will be great spiritual danger." [Complete Works]

satay
24 May 2010, 11:51 PM
namaste isa,

What's wrong with marrying the lower varna? It happens all the time.



Dear ganesh prasaad ji, Your statements can be taken by ambedkarites,periyaarists and made a weapon for anti-brahmin propaganda. Just because of these comments all brahmins or kshatriyes are leveled as racists. As far as I know it is muslims who claim, they can marry non-muslim women but non-muslims cant have muslim women. And believe me in my innumerable fights with ambedkarites, I have always encountered this charge that supposedly according to hindu dharm kshatriyes and and other upper castes have the right to marry women of dalits, but not the other way. Please consider consequences before making such arguments.

isavasya
25 May 2010, 03:48 AM
namaste isa,

What's wrong with marrying the lower varna? It happens all the time.

Namaste satay ji,

yes it happens, even the reverse happens, I was talking about last part of ganesh prasad ji's post 'Brahmin male could marry a lower varna but it is forbiden for brahmin girl to marry a lower varna.'

This is also one part of spreading anti-hindu/anti-brahmin propaganda by ambedkerites/periyarists.

In fact in todays society forward castes have highest rate of intercaste marriage. And that too forward castes women have even higher rate of inter-caste marriage. But still speaking that it is forbidden for forward caste women to marry in other caste but not the male is giving chance to anti-Hindus to poison the minds of many Hindus. In my college life many modern have shown resent that there are all sorts of casteist boundaries in hinduism.

devotee
25 May 2010, 08:38 AM
Namaste Satay,

I agree with most of your points. Regarding carrying the caste of Father is true in Indian Society. But that shows relaxation/accepted deviation from Manu. That is what I want to say that the Hindu Society has been liberal in applying the caste/varna rules.

Regarding Arjuna's status, I never had any problem as I believe in Varna by Guna+karma theory. So, for me, he always was a Kshatriya. Who am I or who is anyone to say otherwise when Lord Krishna himslef calls Arjuna a Kshatriya ?

Regarding "sahaja karma" word used by Lord Krishna ... "sahaja" literally means "by birth" but the usage of this words suggests another meaning as "that which comes naturally" too. I think both these translations are not much different. However, in fact, it denies the Varna by birth theory as we know from our experience that a person born in a brahmin family isn't always born with brahminical qualities and a person born in a sudra family is not always born with sudra qualities.

Actually, this is an endless debate. Many great Hindu personalities in the past couldn't resolve this issue. I have no delusion that I can resolve it. That is why I respectfully agree to disagree with Ganeshprasad ji and other esteemed members of this forum.

I was only trying to stop abuse of people in the name of caste/varna. Please see all my posts on this contentious issue in that context alone. :)

OM

satay
25 May 2010, 08:57 AM
namaskar,

I said that my previous post was the end of discussion from my point of view. However, this question keeps coming to my mind so I ask it here.

There is great confusion because people mix varna and caste together. To me these are not the same. Caste/Gotra is something that gets carried forward from father to children.

To the anti-caste scholars, I ask the following: Let's imagine that there is no caste in Indian society. At the time of any yagya, marriage or funeral rites, the priest will ask you (or your family in case of death) your gotra. What 'gotra' are you going to give to the priest? Or are you going to shun all the yagya, marriage, death ceremonies that require the 'gotra'?

I think that caste system is a practical system in Indian society and dropping your caste is impractical.

Instead of fighting against the caste system, we should fight against the mistreatment of every human being no matter what caste they belong to. That I think can be acheived by properly applying the law of the land. For example, if a brahmin or khatra abuses a low caste person, charge them according to the laws of the land. If it's the other way around, same thing, use the law of the land. Put the justice system to practice and let justice work; that's why we have governments i.e. to ensure equal practical rights to everyone.

Ganeshprasad
25 May 2010, 01:04 PM
Pranam all

I think this has now become personal and emotional, people are building their straw man (army)and then shoot it down.. Today the Varnashram is a mess I don’t need to go into it, nor do I need to justify it. I am still waiting for anyone to convince me how jatKarma would be performed of a child, the name giving of the child for a Brahmin denoting auspicious a Kshatriya connected with power and so on.and then there is question of training in the respective field, begins for a Brahmin 5-8 years old upnayana sanskar, for Kshatriya at 11 and vashiya at 12, the Shastra do not speak of sudra training at all. Who is objectively going to decide the varna of a child at this early stage, to start with the name giving at 10-12 days old? What criteria are you going to use? stick to what is and was traditional


Pranam Isavasya ji




Devotee ji mentioned in previous posts people are unfamiliar with realities of life. I am 100% convinced now that many people are completely unaware about realities of life. Ganesh prasaad ji mentioned yadavas as kshatriye , now for a moment let us forget scriptures and see realities of life.

Oh wise one be convinced yourself, but you are not convincing me, specially if you are going to tell me to forget scriptures, Lord Krishna says in no uncertain terms, let scripture be your guide.

Yadu dynasty perished when Lord Krishna decided to unfold his lila. So all yours and devotee’s assertion holds no water with me.



In todays society they are no where accepted as ksahtriye, in fact only after mulayam yadav ,lalu yadav rose to power yadavas began to assert themselves as ksahtriye. In UP & MP they are looked down as 'ahirs' by forward castes as well as by dalits. In bihar they are called gawaar by forward castes as well as dalits. Mind you above is not my view but I am telling you what is view of society of India. As far as Gujjars are concerned they were initially kshatriye but again lost power and were displaced from kshatriye status by neo-kshatriyes like rajputs.

See above



Now In North India Rajputs and jats are rated as kshatriyes, many people dont count jats though. At the same time there are big communities called Muslim rajputs and muslim jats. If birth decides varna system, are you ready to count muslim rajputs and muslim jats as kshatriyes too ? Dont say all of them converted by force, many of them converted because of greed of holding empires or willingly.

Rajput by name means son of the royals, therefore they can only be Kshatriya but for those who, for what ever reason they left the fold, are no longer in the varna so your question is only for you to decide.



What I want to tell is its not birth but It's karma which ultimately decides varna.

Do tell, but you are defeating your own argument, decide for your self is your birth as a result of your past karma or not? If yes then birth will manifest your svabhav from past karma, if not then this Karma is bogus, there is no reason and rime for our birth.
On the other hand if by ultimate you mean at some point in time, which could be any age your current karma will manifest your varna then you are faced with a vacuum in time where you are without any varna, this would pose a lot of question, I let you think about it.
 


Its just that being born in a particular family enhances the chance a person will follow his parents varna, provided the parents follow too.

Yes this is and was the tradition and it worked perfectly well until the age of Kali set in first the Muslims and then the British saw to that the system is destroyed, but they can never succeed because it is a divine creation.



I asked a question in my previous posts there are many soldiers and policemen protecting our country and it's citizens who were not born in kshatriye family, will you not count them as kshatriye ? Don't say it is rare for people of one varna to show traits of other varna. There are innumerable vaishya,shudra and even brahmins In india army. By arrogantly calling many martyrs of India as shudra because they were born in such caste is the reason there is castism In Indian society, get over these things and start recognizing people by their karma as is message of sanatan dharm. After that it wont take more than 10 years before Islam and Christianity gets kicked out of India.

First let us get this straight who has arrogantly called any martyrs of India a shudra?
I certainly do not appreciate such baseless accusation.

Now coming to the modern army, this is a complete new ball game, organised by political governments issuing orders from behind the desk, the generals plotting their dirty war games hidden behind the underground bunkers, shooting those deadly weapons and killing thousands of innocents with it, not my idea of Ksahtriya who would lead from the front, who uphold dharma and protects the innocents. That is not to say India should not have a modern army and no one here making a judgement on it.
 
 


Dear ganesh prasaad ji, Your statements can be taken by ambedkarites,periyaarists and made a weapon for anti-brahmin propaganda. Just because of these comments all brahmins or kshatriyes are leveled as racists. As far as I know it is muslims who claim, they can marry non-muslim women but non-muslims cant have muslim women. And believe me In my innumerable fights with ambedkarites I have always encountered this charge that supposedly according to hindu dharm kshatriyes and and other upper castes have the right to marry women of dalits, but not the other way. Please consider consequences before making such arguments.

I don’t really care for ambedkarites nor do I formulate my dharma to suit them. I was simply making a point and that point which I said do not quote me, i am not even encouraging intercaste marriage unfortunately western influence is quickly killing our age old tradition of arranged marriages, soon there may not be any varna to talk about, I don’t know why I bother.
 
 
 


I don't know how many innumerable examples have been given to you, smaranam ji and devotee ji gave you examples from upanishad, i also gave you examples of vedic rishis and innumerable examples from vishnu puran where people born in one varna came to be recognized in another varna, do you want me to quote them again ? Also my earnest request mahabharata may be a great book , but we should look to eternal vedas , upanishads more than anything else for coming to conclusion about such thing as Varnashram

So your few examples are innumerable and the millions of people who practice this tradition by birth that had been handed down from time immemorial are wrong?
It is ok for devotee to quote Manu smurti but I should ignore Mahabharat? yes
 
 
 


dharma. Also you had questioned devotee ji over how he can reject Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati's view, now what sort of argument is that ? I say maharshi dayanand saraswati and swami vivekananda support the view of devotee ji, How can you reject them ?
Now you should learn to get your facts right, it was not me who questioned Devotee ji, Tta rightly question him since he follows advaita and Sri Chandrasekhara comes in his lineage.
As for Dayanda or Vivekananda I do not follow either I may respect them but that’s all.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Well in my real life I have seen many rajputs, kayasthas, etc going through jenau sanskaar, but again the caste system has got so abused that many castes are unsure of their varna.. gujjars claim to be kshatriye but rajputs protest this status for gujjars. kayasthas rate themselves to possess dual varna of kshatriye-brahmin but they are taken as vaishya in north india and were taken as sudra in bengal a 100 year ago. marathas claim to be kshatriye but brahmins from maharshtra discounted them from the status, innumerable times I have heard nairs claiming to kshatriye but namboodris not accepting and calling them shudra. Also your claim that kshatriye-vaishya are not doing enough is definitely false. There are many kayasthas, vaishyas,etc who have done much for sanatan dharm, also many mutths are now owned by non-brahmins. Many dharm gurus and dharm propagators are non-brahmins too. Please open your eyes sir.
 
Yes my eyes are wide open, you are not telling us anything new, this is what Goswami Tulasidas had to say I quote a few extract
1052
*›R∫ RÅMACARITAMÅNASA *
Every virtue had been engulfed by the sins of Kali; all good books had disappeared; impostors had promulgated a number of creeds which they had invented out of their own wit. The people had all fallen a prey to delusion and all pious acts had been swallowed by greed. Now listen, all-wise mount of ›r∂ Hari, while I describe a few peculiarities of Kali.
(97 A-B)
 
 
choupai
No one follows the duties of one’s own caste, and the four Åsramas or stages of life also disappear. Every man and woman takes delight in revolting against the Vedas. The Bråhmanas sell the Vedas; the kings bleed their subjects; no one respects the injunction of the Vedas. The right course for every individual is that which one takes a fancy to; a man of erudition is he who plays the braggart. Whoever launches spurious undertakings and is given over to hypocrisy, him does everyone call a saint. He alone is clever, who robs another of his wealth; he who puts up false appearances is an ardent follower of established usage. He who is given to lying and is clever at joking is spoken of as a man of parts in the Kali age. He alone who is a reprobate and has abandoned the path of the Vedas is a man of wisdom and dispassion in the Kali age. He alone who has grown big nails and long locks of matted hair is a renowned ascetic in the Kali age. (1-4)

1054
*›R∫ RÅMACARITAMÅNASA *
Men and women talk of nothing else than the Knowledge of Brahma; while in their greed they would kill a Bråhmana or, for the matter of that, even their own spiritual guide for the sake of a single shell. ›µudras argue with the twice-born : ìAre we in anyway inferior to you? A good Bråhmana is he who knows the truth of Brahma !î and defiantly glower at them.
(99 A-B)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Jai Shree Krishna
 

isavasya
25 May 2010, 06:20 PM
Namaste ganesh prasad ji,



I am still waiting for anyone to convince me how jatKarma would be performed of a child, the name giving of the child for a Brahmin denoting auspicious a Kshatriya connected with power and so on.and then there is question of training in the respective field, begins for a Brahmin 5-8 years old upnayana sanskar, for Kshatriya at 11 and vashiya at 12, the Shastra do not speak of sudra training at all. Who is objectively going to decide the varna of a child at this early stage, to start with the name giving at 10-12 days old? What criteria are you going to use? stick to what is and was traditional

 


It can be done just as satyakama was initiated by gautama without any knowledge about his father's gotra and in spite of his mother being a sudra. The pramana comes from such revered text as chandogya upanishad.




Oh wise one be convinced yourself, but you are not convincing me, specially if you are going to tell me to forget scriptures, Lord Krishna says in no uncertain terms, let scripture be your guide.

Yadu dynasty perished when Lord Krishna decided to unfold his lila.


I have previously said you can follow your belief sir, I have problem only when Idea of people who talk about varna through karma are seen as wrong. Of course interpretation can be certain for me and you both.



Yes yadu dynasty perished with lord krishna's lla, but there are as much as 54 Million Hindus who claim to be Yadavas from krishna's clan. Whether you ignore them or not, the problem of what varna should be assigned to these 54 million hindus or should they be counted Avarna will remain irrespective of your or any one's brushing of the issue, all these things matters a lot if varna is by birth solely.The whole system can get disturbed.



Rajput by name means son of the royals, therefore they can only be Kshatriya but for those who, for what ever reason they left the fold, are no longer in the varna so your question is only for you to decide.


Rajput by name means son of the royals, therefore they can only be Kshatriya ?


This is quite an amazing argument but much to ponder over. You say those who left Hindu fold and converted to Islam are no longer in varna. Fine that's Ok with me. But you assign dharma of one person with his varna. Again varna assigns occupation. So shouldn't you also relegate people who leave their varna's duties from fold of their varna ? some reality check- I come from a society (Muhhala) which is primarily rajput dominated, at least 10-11 of my friends are rajputs, I hardly know 1 or 2 whose relatives are in army or police. Some come from thekedar background (constructor) , some are engineers, teachers or have peasant background, some are even shopkeeper. How they can be considered kshatriye now ? For me here starts a mockery of pious varnashrama dharma.




Do tell, but you are defeating your own argument, decide for your self is your birth as a result of your past karma or not? If yes then birth will manifest your svabhav from past karma, if not then this Karma is bogus, there is no reason and rime for our birth.
On the other hand if by ultimate you mean at some point in time, which could be any age your current karma will manifest your varna then you are faced with a vacuum in time where you are without any varna, this would pose a lot of question, I let you think about it.



Again the argument is actually against birth based system particularly in kaliyuga as I have shown in the apparent conflicts we see in the real society. Its very rare that people born in a particular varna are really showing characteristic of that varna. Apart from example of people not doing occupation of their varna so many kshatriye clans conversion to Islam (some times forced, some times by greed or consent) is a clear proof in Kaliyuga the inheritance level is much weak. Even from shastra you should see that with time human behavior and power has changed. In tretayuga people lived for 10000 of years, does that happens now ? Tapasyavis were able to get boons from devtas, but it doesn't happens now. Remember it is kaliyuga and power of inheritance is not so much. My argument is simple one.


First let us get this straight who has arrogantly called any martyrs of India a shudra?

Now coming to the modern army, this is a complete new ball game, organized by political governments issuing orders from behind the desk, the generals plotting their dirty war games hidden behind the underground bunkers, shooting those deadly weapons and killing thousands of innocents with it, not my idea of Ksahtriya who would lead from the front, who uphold dharma and protects the innocents. That is not to say India should not have a modern army and no one here making a judgment on it.




I think it is our neighbours and Maoists who play those dirty games and of course our army are truly doing kshatriye's Job. Each day so many jawans give their life for protecting our country. Again I hadn't got any answer from my previous question so I had raised it. So if you truly respect martyrs and believe them kshatriye then many of those who lay their life are born in non-kshatriye family. This again proves one can be a kshatriye by karma or any varna irrespective of birth with your assent.





Now you should learn to get your facts right, it was not me who questioned Devotee ji, Tta rightly question him since he follows advaita and Sri Chandrasekhara comes in his lineage.
As for Dayanda or Vivekananda I do not follow either I may respect them but that’s all.
 
I wont answer for such senior member like devotee ji, but let me clarify for myself (though I am not a advaitin) being advaitin doesn't necessarily means following sri Chandrasekhara saraswati ji, with all due respect for sri chandrasekhara saraswati ji, he is acharya of smartha sampradaya, There are many people who follow Neo-adviata of vivekananda or some other gurus and they may not follow sri chandrasekhara saraswati ji.



So your few examples are innumerable and the millions of people who practice this tradition by birth that had been handed down from time immemorial are wrong?[/i]

 

In today's society I don't see even 20% people rightfully sticking to their varna. I gave you many examples, of course even our veda,upanishad,mahabharata ,ramayana and purans are not authored by people born in true brahmin family, had they been really belonging to same varna as their birth, they could have wrote tamsic texts, but by tapasya, knowledge or jnana they all excelled. (ex- valmiki-ramayana, satyakama -many upanishad, some vedic mantras credited to non-brahmins) But I don't see any reasons to continue this debate, I respect your thought but I have the right to follow mine too.




Yes my eyes are wide open, you are not telling us anything new, this is what Goswami Tulasidas had to say I quote a few extract
 

If people realize what they really are and even society treats people without hypocrisy sanatan dharm will be much better off. Traditionalists should also try to understand my views, I am not only one with my view, many hindus share my view. Our country's and religion's existence itself is in trouble. The adharmic religions have captured Sindh kashmir, bangladesh etc which are parts of akhand bharat. They are even growing in population in remaining India day by day. 24% Hindus of pakistan has become 1 % after brutal and forceful conversion. Same is story of bangladesh. Our society is completely divided on basis of caste, we know perverted media wrongly portrays that few so called elites hindus suppress some people belonging to particular dalit or OBC castes, we all know in our society people of high CLASS and power suppress poor people, and many times it is forward castes more than any who get suppressed, reservation & Maoist terror for example. Some of my own relatives have suffered from these maoists. By realizing our fellow hindus status according to their karma and trying to get various hindus into actively indulging in sanatan dharm we can get out of this mess and kick out Jihadis and missionaries and save our country and dharm. Thats all i am saying here.


I think this has now become personal and emotional, people are to building their straw man (army)and then shoot it down..

 


I don't think it is anything like that, I don't understand why you always refer that many people with progressive thinking are calling varna system blot here. All admire varna system, but attaching karma as a big factor in deciding varna doesn't amounts to calling it blot.

Ganeshprasad
26 May 2010, 08:41 AM
Pranam Isavasya ji


Namaste ganesh prasad ji,
It can be done just as satyakama was initiated by gautama without any knowledge about his father's gotra and in spite of his mother being a sudra. The pramana comes from such revered text as chandogya upanishad.

You still have not answered all the questions and frankly there are no clear answers.
As for the revered text of chanddogya upanisad people tend to forget the requirement for the ashram was to know a Brahmin gotra for the student to enrol. If in a rare case Gautama rsi ascertain that only Brahmin could have spoken such a truth he accepted him. Not that he was accepting anyone from other varna simply because they could or may speak the truth.
On the other hand in Mahabharat Dronacharya would only teach to Kshtriya boys even though Karna was able but by his apparent birth, he was rejected, so was Ekvaliya here ability was not the requirement but his birth was the main criteria.

As I keep repeating my self, the Kali yuga is in progress, Dharma has become more and more obscure; the standard has dropped in all the varna, not helped by the brutal occupation of foreigners. (this class ridden bigotry was exaggerated and exploited by the biggest class conscious, the Brits) it is our own further going away from Dharma that this system is being destroyed.

I will not deviate from Shastra and tradition ? It is still the best system on offer if we strip out the discriminatory and egoistic superiority complex.

Class system is never going to go away. Good luck if you can improve it, for me varna system is meaning less if there is no Dharma.







I wont answer for such senior member like devotee ji, but let me clarify for myself (though I am not a advaitin) being advaitin doesn't necessarily means following sri Chandrasekhara saraswati ji, with all due respect for sri chandrasekhara saraswati ji, he is acharya of smartha sampradaya, There are many people who follow Neo-adviata of vivekananda or some other gurus and they may not follow sri chandrasekhara saraswati ji.


Try sticking to the point, you had accused me off the statement i had nothinh to do with.
Your objection was answered, it was a reasonable question to ask by TTA, your answer does not reflect your original question.

Rest of your post I have no time to address especially when it deals with mess up that the system is.

Jai Shree Krishna
 
 

isavasya
26 May 2010, 12:59 PM
Namaste ganesh prasad ji,


Pranam Isavasya ji



You still have not answered all the questions and frankly there are no clear answers.
 

As far as I am concerned, Its me who answered all your queries and you said you wont reply to all my questions because of time limitations. Whether my answers are not clear or yours is for each of us to decide.



As for the revered text of chanddogya upanisad people tend to forget the requirement for the ashram was to know a Brahmin gotra for the student to enrol. If in a rare case Gautama rsi ascertain that only Brahmin could have spoken such a truth he accepted him. Not that he was accepting anyone from other varna simply because they could or may speak the truth.


He was clear in his choosing the boy, his criteria was purity of heart and satwic nature of satyakama. It was the Guna by which he was chosen. Of course his mother was a shudra anyways. Drona is not the only example in the world. Drona even fought on side of adharmis, which proves a person may not be right in everything he does. Aietreya mahidasa and kavash ailush story supports my stand too. Now again the same thing you are doing, many scholars are clear regarding story of satyakama as I have described, but if you have your own concept of that story supported by some of scholars you like, then I have no problem, but then I wont change my stand . You follow your beliefs and I will mine without forcing.



I will not deviate from Shastra and tradition ? It is still the best system on offer if we strip out the discriminatory and egoistic superiority complex.

So will I not deviate, sanatan dharm permits people to live life according to their guna.




Rest of your post I have no time to address especially when it deals with mess up that the system is.


Well you already accept the system is in mess, I will do my best to improve it. You may answer or not, the mess is destroying sanatan dharm.


for me varna system is meaning less if there is no Dharma.




Exactly! Thats whats happening today .

Ganeshprasad
26 May 2010, 02:23 PM
Pranam Isavasya ji


Namaste ganesh prasad ji,



As far as I am concerned, Its me who answered all your queries and you said you wont reply to all my questions because of time limitations. Whether my answers are not clear or yours is for each of us to decide.

great so you have addressed my query as to namkaran sanshkar, a brahmin boy gets auspicious name, a Kshatriya connected with power and so on.and then there is question of training in the respective field, begins for a Brahmin 5-8 years old upnayana sanskar, for Kshatriya at 11 and vashiya at 12, the Shastra do not speak of sudra training at all.

your theory until such time the guna manifest which could be any age, the child remains avarna? yes.




He was clear in his choosing the boy, his criteria was purity of heart and satwic nature of satyakama.


So there was no requirement in his ashram to know the Gotra yes? i wonder why he would be asked that in the first place?

Jai Shree Krishna

isavasya
26 May 2010, 04:30 PM
Pranaam ganesh prasad ji



great so you have addressed my query as to namkaran sanshkar, a brahmin boy gets auspicious name, a Kshatriya connected with power and so on.and then there is question of training in the respective field, begins for a Brahmin 5-8 years old upnayana sanskar, for Kshatriya at 11 and vashiya at 12, the Shastra do not speak of sudra training at all.
your theory until such time the guna manifest which could be any age, the child remains avarna? yes.


Sudra here means those who never leave the gunas of sudra and never are fit to be vaishya,brahmin or ksahtriye. These sort of people never need to be initiated.


These ages are prescribed as auspicious for child having traits of respective varnas to be initiated, it is not that one can't have the gunas of any varna after these age. I think you should know in many parts of India quite a few brahmins go through upanayana sanskaar during marriage or elder brother's marriage. Do they lose their varna if they dont go through upanayana during prescribed age?



Now coming to second part, no till upanayana children are not be considered avarna, but shudra. Even a child born in a brahmin family is considered a sudra till he is fit to be initiated.


janmana jayate sudrah
samskarad bhaved dvijah
veda-pathad bhaved vipro
brahma janatiti brahmanah


"By birth every one is a shudra, by samskars he becomes a Dvija (i.e., twice-born). By learning (studying Vedas), he becomes a Vipra and by realizing Brahman, he attains the status of a Brahmana.


So by proper training only one steps up the ladder of spirituality or sanskaras. Again I will say, If a child is born in a practicing brahmin,kshatriye,vaishya,sudra parents, he is more likely to follow, but he can also denigrate to lower level, and at times he can also climb up. Showing Vaishya's and kshatriye's guna is relatively easier but showing traits of brahmin is very very difficult.


Remember even we have examples in shastra ,also we can see in real life how some people fall or rise from level of his parents and of course history also shows, Devil dhananand was thrown out of his empire by mahapandit chanakya with aid of Sudra chandragupta. We must remember chanakya was no ordinary brahmana. The end result of this turnover was India became golden bird and chandragupta finished many evil mellechas from bharat varsha.


So there was no requirement in his ashram to know the Gotra yes? i wonder why he would be asked that in the first place?


Of course sir during those times in those yuga, inheritance was much greater than today , so normally children born in brahmana family came and thus gautama asked about satyakama's gotra, but even if he failed to mention about his fathers gotra and his mother was sudra, he was taken by gautama because of his guna and behaviour of truthfulness. So one can be initiated despite being born in lower varna. But for that one has to show behaviour of truth and piousness.

devotee
26 May 2010, 09:33 PM
Namaste all,



Sudra here means those who never leave the gunas of sudra and never are fit to be vaishya,brahmin or ksahtriye. These sort of people never need to be initiated.

That is an excellent observation ! :)

I would add here a bit :

Initiation of a Brahmin boy at an early stage is good and auspicious. There can't be any harm in that. If he is not able to conform to the requirements of being a Brahmin .... he will come to his natural lower status. Coming from a higher state to a lower one is not discriminatory. Stopping a person to go the higher state is a crime. A "Sudra boy by birth", if he exhibits excellent traits and inclination to learn, should not be left out on the plea that he was born into a lower varna. If he is discriminated on the basis of his birth, it will not only be injustice against him personally but the society will also be a loser by failing to gain from his potential of becoming better than what is prescribed by the promoters of "varna by birth" for him !

The problem is not in initiation of a Brahmin ... the problem starts when we try to make it a rule for all castes on the basis of birth. For example, even if one can be an excellent warrior but as he is a Sudra we would ask him to mend shoes because his father was a shoemaker. One of the the Rig Veda's Rishi's father was a doctor (a Sudra or a Vaisya ? ) by profession and his mother ground grains (a Sudra). If that Rishi was stopped from learning & forced to learn the art of selecting medicines or grinding grains, would we get the benefit of his wisdom in the form of his richas today ? If Chandragupta Maurya (a Sudra) was forced to learn only the art of taming peacocks from his father, would we get as excellent an emperor as him ? Let's not forget that no Kshatriya emperor could match the prowess and skill of a ruler of Chandragupta Maurya. The goden period of India was during the rule of the Gupta dynasty. If the Guptas were told to concentrate only on their business than adopting Kshatriya Dharma, India would have certainly missed the benefit of their good rule. Even today, if Mr Manmohan Singh (a Sudra) would have been forced to adopt only the trade of of his caste, the India would have gone into deep fianancial crisis in the early nineties.

The destruction of the Mahabharata could have been stopped if Arjuna's behaviour towards Karna was not discriminatory on the basis of caste ! Already India has suffered a lot by such discrimination and yet we have not learnt any lesson. The so called lower castes in India today are using these theories ( the varna by birth) to show how they were discriminated by the so-called upper castes ... which is false for the majority of castes (like Yadavas, the Kurmis, Jats, Gurjars, Banias etc. ... in fact almost the entire OBC). We are only helping them to spread this canard & bring more and more discriminatoy laws against the so-called upper castes. The fact is (even recorded by the Chinese pilgrims) that except the "untouchables" no caste was in a disadvantageous position in the society. The Vaisya, though lower than the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas controlled the economy of the society ! Many old stories start like this : "There was a poor brahmin" ... has anyone heard this story, "There was a poor bania" ?

The brahmins have become the most favourite whipping boy for such political parties. Those who are in foreign countries don't understand the implications of strengthening "varna by birth" theory. It is the Indians who have to bear the brunt. Think of the brahmins and other upper castes who are discriminated against in all stages of life in India on the "varna by birth" theory. It has almost become a curse to be born in India in a brahmin or in any upper caste family. If you are wealthy, you can manage ... what happens to the people who are poor, downtrodden but labelled as "upper caste" ?

Anyway, I have already spoken more than my quota on this issue. I bow out of this thread here.

OM

Ganeshprasad
27 May 2010, 07:49 AM
Pranam Isavasya ji and all
There are lots of if and buts and personal opinions, through the lack of time I pick on two or three points


Pranaam ganesh prasad ji

Even a child born in a brahmin family is considered a sudra till he is fit to be initiated.

janmana jayate sudrah
samskarad bhaved dvijah
veda-pathad bhaved vipro
brahma janatiti brahmanah.



Now we know when a child is born to any family, there is a period of Asudhi ie.sutak, not that the child is Sudra varna, even in Satpath brahmana, when the kumar is born, he cries give me a name because without that I am sinful.

Well I never knew child had to be fit to receive his initiation, yes 'samskarad bhaved dvijah'

namkaran, jatkarma, upanaya these are all given to a child, he is hardly going to display his fitness at that early stage.

There is a high responsibility placed on a brahmana and there is a higher price to pay should he fail in his duties, some like us to believe that varna can be interchanged at a whim, good for them but that is not what Lord Krishna says, It is better to engage in one's own duty, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's duty and perform it perfectly---bg18.47 however we may want to read this verse Krishna is clearly saying change is not advisable.

Chandragupta moriya has been freely quoted as a sudra, I like to know what authority decided that without any ambiguity because I have read, all being on internet so I will not insist that to be true that he was a kshatriya.
 
Jai Shree Krishna

isavasya
27 May 2010, 04:07 PM
Pranam Isavasya ji and all
There are lots of if and buts and personal opinions, through the lack of time I pick on two or three points


I don't understand if you have lack of time, why are you indulging in this debate, you are free to carry your opinion and I am free to, you can peacefully disagree with me, I have no problems. You seem to be hell bent on proving 'Only My ideology is right '. By the way whatever I write to question about perverted state of varna/caste system, you don't have any answer except lack of time and don't want to see the mess which has been created. You have no problems in giving such hilarious logic as 'Rajput by name means son of the royals, therefore they can only be Kshatriya', when I tell you to see real condition and what is the normal occupation of so called so many of born son of the royals, you don't have time to answer me.







Now we know when a child is born to any family, there is a period of Asudhi ie.sutak, not that the child is Sudra varna, even in Satpath brahmana, when the kumar is born, he cries give me a name because without that I am sinful.

The sloka which I quoted is very clear and exact in meaning. It means
"By birth every one is a shudra, by samskars he becomes a Dvija (i.e., twice-born). By learning (studying Vedas), he becomes a Vipra and by realizing Brahman, he attains the status of a Brahmana.




[Well I never knew child had to be fit to receive his initiation, yes 'samskarad bhaved dvijah'

I can see todays world, people go on living life of trash, earn like vaishya or sudra do business like a vasihya but claim to be holier tan thau.



namkaran, jatkarma, upanaya these are all given to a child, he is hardly going to display his fitness at that early stage.

There is a high responsibility placed on a brahmana and there is a higher price to pay should he fail in his duties, some like us to believe that varna can be interchanged at a whim, good for them but that is not what Lord Krishna says, It is better to engage in one's own duty, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's duty and perform it perfectly---bg18.47 however we may want to read this verse Krishna is clearly saying change is not advisable.

Fine , this is not the interpretation for everyone sir, many scholars translate it other ways, you can like it your way but not force it the way.



Chandragupta moriya has been freely quoted as a sudra, I like to know what authority decided that without any ambiguity because I have read, all being on internet so I will not insist that to be true that he was a kshatriya.
 
I am from magadha myself, i have heard it from all the scholars, and even all the senior people, I dont now how to go back 2300 years back and film him, By the I wont have fights for this silly thing.


I am finding this discussion going no where. You see people following materialistic life style of today, doing jobs in MNC , and yet talk about occupation attached to varna.




The brahmins have become the most favourite whipping boy for such political parties. Those who are in foreign countries don't understand the implications of strengthening "varna by birth" theory. It is the Indians who have to bear the brunt. Think of the brahmins and other upper castes who are discriminated against in all stages of life in India on the "varna by birth" theory. It has almost become a curse to be born in India in a brahmin or in any upper caste family. If you are wealthy, you can manage ... what happens to the people who are poor, downtrodden but labelled as "upper caste" ?

Anyway, I have already spoken more than my quota on this issue. I bow out of this thread here.



Exactly devotee ji, even I am troubled by all that is going. Now WB government has come up with 10% extra reservation for non-hindus, it all comes to fact that very soon the lovers of sanatan dharm will be totally out populated and more pakistan, bangladesh, kashmir is to be formed, kerala, wb, assam ? eh we wont unite ? The pain is some people don't understand the pains of millions of poor brahmins or rajputs etc who have lost most of their lands since 47, who are living in desperate situation , not interested in any must to follow occupation, but getting forced to hard-work since childhood with aim of finding a good living. These people have bleakest future. But here are people who are giving enough ammunition to mayas, karunanidhis,lalus,paswans etc to kill sanatam dharm even more forcefully. I wish lord shiva dissolves his creation soon enough.

Ganeshprasad
27 May 2010, 05:24 PM
Prsanam

I am sorry you can not believe me when i said i have no time, i don't have to justify my self to you.
you have come across one very frustrated fellow, and it shows in your post. you have adopted a defensive stance and has tired to deflect the real answer to my question by your rants. you have hardly answered my questions split them and answered them out of context.

so have it your way

Jai Shree Krishna

isavasya
27 May 2010, 07:44 PM
Namaste ganesh prasad ji,


Thanks for showering the adjectives, by the way seeing your staunch beliefs not just extending till your own swadharm but deciding the fate of each and every other human on this planet, all i can say is best of luck.:)

satay
27 May 2010, 09:04 PM
namaste,


I wish lord shiva dissolves his creation soon enough.

2012

satay
27 May 2010, 09:12 PM
namaskar,
:)


Those who are in foreign countries don't understand the implications of strengthening "varna by birth" theory. OM

I find this to be quite a generalization. I found it funny.
There are many here that are in a foreign country but were raised in India. I think they understand the issue.

Those in foreign countries say: Stick to sastra and don't change things based on political pressures of the country!:p

No?
Now, I don't want to keep this can of worms open but just made the above comments as friends. Hope you understand my joke here.

Let's end this thread on this note as it is going no where. No one is ready to back down.

rainycity
28 May 2010, 04:03 AM
so Ganeshprasad, do you believe that everybody born into the brahmin caste has brahmana qualities and likewise for all other castes?

Ganeshprasad
28 May 2010, 05:47 AM
Pranam rainycity

Generally yes but this quality has to be natured, sanskars has to be instilled from the very beginning.

There are a lot of permutations to consider. Like if you saw a seed the creeper springs up if proper care is not taken it will wither, all the while it is alive that creeper will be a particular species regardless of its health. Or if a lion cub is raised as a rabbit it will eventually saw its trait.
I have a plane to catch so forgive me if I do not reply.


pancaitani maha-baho
karanani nibodha me
sankhye krtante proktani
siddhaye sarva-karmanam
adhisthanam tatha karta
karanam ca prthag-vidham
vividhas ca prthak cesta
daivam caivatra pancamam

Learn from Me, O Arjuna, the five causes, as described in the Saamkhya doctrine, for the accomplishment of all actions. (18.13)
The physical body or the seat of Karma, the doer or the Guna, various instruments or the organs (of perception and action), various Pranas or bioimpulses, and the fifth is the presiding deities (or the five basic elements). (18.14)

O mighty-armed Arjuna, learn from Me of the five factors which bring about the accomplishment of all action. These are declared in sankhya philosophy to be the place of action, the performer, the senses, the endeavor, and ultimately the daivam. 13/14

Jai Shree Krishna

TatTvamAsi
09 June 2010, 01:04 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté TTA

This subject has been contentious here on HDF over the years , and I am not here to fan the flames.

IMHO a Hindu comes from birth, and not from proclamation. Why so? Hindu as I understand it was originally a secular term used to depict all the inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent (or Hindustan) irrespective of their religious affiliation. It seems straight forward to consider one is a Hindu if from Hindustan.

Yet it is my firm belief that one can practice and assimilate sanātana dharma even if not aboriginal to India. It is universal by nature and we are blessed as a people that India and those of Hindustan have carried sanātana dharma for all to view, consider and practice. For this we are indebited World-wide to the effort and the compassion of the Indian people to be patient with the rest of the world to catch up.

praṇām

Namaste Yajvan,

And I agree with you. If you read my posts with some discretion, you will see that I am just keen on the fact that only people who are truly sincere should take up the virtues of Sanatana Dharma or anything associated with it. For far too long and for far too many people, MISAPPROPRIATION of not on Hindu philosophy, but of many Indian traditions has been commonplace.

This is precisely the role of a guru and dIkSa. Sanatana Dharma is not a 'drink to be tried out for a year'. It IS the nature of reality and to those coming from outside, who don't look at it that way due to ignorance, trample on Hindus' sentiments with impunity.

That is what I am against.

Respect, devotion, and sensitivity needs to be shown towards Hinduism/India by those interested. Otherwise, they are like the robbers who attack the elephant to take its ivory tusks and leave it writhing in pain. That is simply something that cannot be allowed and nor should it be.

Namaskar.

TatTvamAsi
09 June 2010, 01:06 AM
Namaste Saidevo,

An excellent brief of this sensitive topic.

Varna is by BIRTH, ACTION, and CHARACTER.

Namaskar.


namaste Isavasya.



01. In the olden days, it was the responsibility of the King to ensure that everyone conformed to his varNa. The Dharma ShAstras and other texts gave the authority to the King to punish those who swerved out of their varNa and cast them into the avarNa group, for a certain period or even permanently. If such a system existed today, brahmins would definitely follow their varNa with vigour and dedication.

02. In the society of our olden days, brahmins were supported for their living by the other varNas, so they had no necessity or reason to worry about the three basic necessities of life--food, clothes and shelter--and devote their entire time to the varNa dharma. Even some fifty or sixty years back, some brahmin families in villages subsisted on unja-vritti--getting alms of rice for cooking. And today, most of the brahmin families in villages whose breadwinners are temple priests, live in poverty, with no scope to give their children competitive worldly education.

03. Since a person's guNa-karma decides the birth which in turn decides the varNa, even in the olden days, some of the brAhmaNas practised the occupations of other varNas and excelled in them: Sage drONAchArya is a classic example, and there were many other examples detailed in my post http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=43232&postcount=6 . This shows that although the King had the responsibility to regulate varNa dharma, he also had the discretion to recognize and promote deserving cases, based on their skills and social acceptability.

04. Again in the olden days, all the three varNas--brAhmaNas, kShatriyas and vyshyas--were initiated as dvijas by the upanayanam ceremony and sent to the gurukulam for studying the Vedas (although it was mostly brahmins who chanted the Vedas in rituals). The shUdras were exempted because Vedic Sanskrit was not their mother tongue and they had no time for such endeavours.

In the totally changed circumstances today,

• How many people from the kShatriya and vyshya varNa wear the holy thread they are eligible to, and are willing to take up the study of Vedas?

• Although politicians would make the world believe that the shUdras are not allowed to study the Vedas, how many of the shUdras have the real inclination and preference towards it, when even the brahmins whose occupation it is, struggle to make both ends meet in their daily life?

• The objective of the politicians is to destroy Hindu Dharma, not just the varNa. Since they can't give logical reasoning for abolition of varNa and caste, which system is in fact a guardian of Hindu Dharma, they declare themselves as atheists and secularists to the public and attack Hinduism.

Had it not been for Gandhiji, India would have been a Hindu nation, and would have preserved the time-honoured varNa and caste system which has distinctions with explicit strictures against discrimination. Such distinction with utmost discrimination does exist in all forms of hierarchical systems in public and private life of the modern society, and this is because of the human guNa-karma and ego.