Law of Manu - Caste System

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�

There have been some substantial cut 'n pastes within this string. While mildly interesting, me thinks the HDF community has great interest in what one thinks of the information provided... Quality vs. quantity is of great value here at HDF; a POV with insights is highly attractive.

praṇām

[chandu_69]

These arguments have already been addressed here.

....

regards,

Sanatana dharma has made a cogent post(No 7) regarding swabhav determining varna.There are several instances where people with no proper identification based on birth became scripture writers.There are other examples besides dronacharya.

Unfortunately,You response to dhyandev appears to be in poor taste.

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

Well, I'd respond to that last comment, but I don't see it as revealing much interest in actually reviewing the evidence. I can't help but note that, 8 points were raised by me and totally ignored by those who claim that the revisionist position is obviously correct. What to speak of the entire thread where we discussed these things.

Oh well....

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Chandu welcome back
I certainly I do not think post no 7 was particularly made in good taste, logic aside, we can all create a straw man and apply logic, without really answering the questions posed.

Why would anyone respond to a post which begins with and I quote �and half knowledge based self proclaimed intellectual idiots who preach illogical personal opinions for personal gain.�� end quote

Or we should shut the gob supposedly by watching tv serial.

I did not find those remark particularly in good taste either.

Jai Shree Krishna

[wundermonk]

These arguments have already been addressed here.

....

regards,

Sanatana dharma has made a cogent post(No 7) regarding swabhav determining varna.There are several instances where people with no proper identification based on birth became scripture writers.There are other examples besides dronacharya.

Unfortunately,You response to dhyandev appears to be in poor taste.

Bingo!

Even ONE example of a person changing varna within one lifetime is enough to disprove a supposed theorem that varna is determined by lineage/birth.

It is fine to propose a general theorem and then make exceptions but then the causal factors leading to such exceptions need to be explained. Unless such details are provided, we can safely disregard the comments of the proponents of the general theorem.

[PARAM]

There are priests in India who hate untouchables, why are there no learned hindu scholars bringing this information to the forefront?

There are even Dalit priests in many temples, many ancient temples were build by the forefathers of those caste based Dalits, there is no priests in India who hate them, this hate is media sponsored. There is no temple where priest ask about caste of any visitor, but Hindu only temples do exist.

Vishvaamitra (who, by the way, was not accepted as a brahmin by Vasishtha despite already performing austerities and then endeavoring to perform a yagna for King Trishanku

Where it is mentioned that "Vishvaamitra was not accepted as Brahmin by Vasishtha"? Vishvaamitra was just not described as "Brahamrishi", because only Brahma bestows this title, and he did penance for this.

Arjuna wanted to renounce his kShatriya duties and take up a brahmin's duties - he was qualified for this, having performed austerities for years in vanavasam, but it was not accepted by Sri Krishna.

Arjun was a kShatriya by his KarMa, he performed austerities for warfare qualities and weapons. What Krishna said is properly mentioned in Bhagwad Gita.

Duryodhana and his Kaurava brothers were all known as kshatriyas despite their wickedness.

Wickedness is not a license of being anything. Duryodhana only wanted to be the king and targeted Pandavs for this. Duryodhana was pure heart for his parents, he always respected Balrama and others, and had pure friendship with Karna. Just being bad to some don't make him non-kShatriya unless he quit his warrior life, he fought till end, this was his kShatriya lifestyle.

Karna was not accepted as a kshatriya because he was raised by non-kshatriya parents - Arjuna's protesting of his presence in the arena due to a non-kshatriya lineage led to a decades-long grudge between the two.

It was Bheem who protested Karna, and that too because Karna was challenging his brother Arjuna, this was Pandav's anger against a challenger. Itihasa show many such claims, even Shakuntala described Dushyanta as Shudra for not remembering her.

4) Mucukunda was a king who had the direct vision of Sri Krishna - he was granted a chance to become a brahmin in his next birth but was not immediately transformed into a brahmin despite his piety and devotion.

Bhagwad Gita itself talk about duty seriously, there are countless examples of sacrificing desires to perform duty. Remaining a King instead of becoming a Sage is bad?

5) Drona and Ashvatthaama were brahmins by birth and were known as such despite their predisposition to the fighting arts.

This misses serious facts that Drona and Ashvatthaama were born in the clan of Bhardwaja, who himself was from the same clan that of Valmiki and also a disciple of Valmiki. Both Drona and Ashvatthaama were jobless and they were employed by Duryodhana as his lieutenants.

6) Ashvatthaama was known as a brahmin despite his murdering of the sons of the Paandavas - his life was specifically spared on this account.

How can anyone say his life was "specifically" spared on this account? Ashvatthaama was disqualified and banished. If his life was "specifically spared" then what was the reason to fake his death during the war and Kill Dronacharya after disarming him instead of sparing his life too when he was much better and noble?

Satyakaama was asked his gotra by Gautama prior to initiation. Since gotra is a hereditary designation, this indicates that the hereditary lineage was a prerequisite for study of the Veda. Note that, Sri Shankara, Sri Ramanuja, and Sri Madhva each quote this story to illustrate the point that a shuudra is not entitled to study of the Veda. They do NOT interpret it as meaning that the lineage does not matter, only that Gautama had ascertained that the lineage was brahminical.

For this people have to learn what the meaning of Shudra is. Can they tell us Krishna was a kShatriya, so why he supported Brahmins, and so now Yadavs and Jats are kShatriyas or Shudra for being birth based SC/ST/OBC?

Shvetaketu is told by his father to accept a guru and study the Veda because they are brahmins and this is their duty; he is specifically told that he should not neglect this and be a brahmin in name only.

If birth is the answer then Shvetaketu was a born Brahmin without any teachings, yet this was not accepted. Don�t miss Shvetaketu's nephew Ashtavakra, he described all Brahmins in the court of Janak as cobbler for judging by skin, this happened in the front of everyone, and all accepted that only their action can make them Brahmin.

There are so many other examples to illustrate the point that birth generally lead to one's varNa classification, and very few examples suggesting otherwise.

Seriously the opponent to this claim is truth. During the British era when caste system was blooming, most of the reformers used manusamriti to prove that original Varna system was based on deeds and a Brahmin's son is a Brahmin only because he follows the same deeds (and this was constitution). This was rejected by caste supporters who got reservations under British rule and they burned Manusamriti just to stop others understanding the truth of Varna.

We need to get out of this politically-correct idea that birth-based class system is inherently evil. No doubt, it has been corrupted, but such is the case with class systems everywhere - there is no classless system anywhere, nor will there ever be. If divinely ordained classes and the duties assigned to them are not accepted, then people will accept implicit class designations based on materialistic traits instead of true virtues. Thus, we have the crazy system we have today where Hindus earn advanced professional degrees, make money in big companies, and think themselves better than the sincere sages whose only wealth is their austerity. This is also a corruption of the true system.
regards,

We are doing this but it is those so called lower castes that are enjoying birth based reservations and it is they themselves who are promoting birth based system only for their reservation.

[philosoraptor]

Bingo!

Even ONE example of a person changing varna within one lifetime is enough to disprove a supposed theorem that varna is determined by lineage/birth.

It is fine to propose a general theorem and then make exceptions but then the causal factors leading to such exceptions need to be explained. Unless such details are provided, we can safely disregard the comments of the proponents of the general theorem.

Pranams,

Well, OK then. I guess we could similarly argue that there is no need to be honest, or there is no need to be vegetarian, in Hinduism. There is no point in talking about such rules, given the few exceptions that exist - they aren't rules.

And we could similarly argue that one does not have to do one's prescribed duty (gItA 18.47) even though Sri Krishna said it, because there are exceptions to that, too.

[philosoraptor]

Where it is mentioned that "Vishvaamitra was not accepted as Brahmin by Vasishtha"?

Please refer to vAlmIki-rAmAyaNa,bAla-kANDa, 59th sarga:

ukta vaakyam tu raajaanam kR^ipayaa kushika aatmajaH |
abraviit madhuram vaakyam saakSaat caNDaalataam gatam || 1-59-1

"Vishvamitra, the son of Kushi, piteously spoke this mellowly sentence to king Trishanku who spoke thus, and who in reality attained a state of profaner." Thus Sage Shataananda continued his narration. [1-59-1]

ikSvaako svaagatam vatsa jaanaami tvaam sudhaarmikam |
sharaNam te bhaviSyaami maa bhaiSiiH nR^ipa pu.ngava || 1-59-2

" 'Oh, Trishanku, the legatee of Ikshvaku-s, you are welcome. I am aware that you are a highly righteous king. Oh, the best king, you need not be dismayed, for I accord you haven. [1-59-2]

aham aama.ntraye sarvaan mahar.hSiin puNya karmaNaH |
yaj~na saahya karaan raajan tato yakSyasi nirvR^itaH || 1-59-3

" 'I will invite all the sages with pious activities who will render assistance in the ritual, oh, king, then you can perform the ritual self-composedly. [1-59-3]

guru shaapa kR^itam ruupam yat idam tvayi var.htate |
anena saha ruupeNa sa shariiro gamiSyasi || 1-59-4

" 'You can go to heaven with this body of yours, as well as with the form which is deformed by the curse of mentor Vashishta through his sons. [1-59-4]

hasta praaptam aham manye svargam tava nareshvara |
yaH tvam kaushikam aagamya sharaNyam sharaNaagataH || 1-59-5

" 'I deem that heaven is handy to you, oh, king of subjects, as you have approached the all-sheltering Vishvamitra and sought shelter.' Thus Vishvamitra solaced Trishanku. [1-59-5]

evam uktvaa mahaatejaaH putraan parama dhaarmikaan |
vyaadidesha mahaapraaj~naan yaj~na sa.mbhaara kaaraNaat || 1-59-6

"On saying thus to Trishanku that great-resplendent Vishvamitra ordered his highly righteous and astutely brilliant sons to organise the arrangements for the ritual. [1-59-6]

sarvaan shiSyaan samaahuuya vaakyam etat uvaaca ha |
sarvaan R^iSi varaan vashiSThaan aanayadhvam mama aaj~nayaa || 1-59-7

"Vishvamitra calling forth all of his disciples said this sentence, 'invite all the eminent sages who are well-read in many Veda-s, along with their disciples and friends, and their ritwiks, the conductors of rituals, and even the sons of Vashishta, at my order. [1-59-7, 8a]

yat anyo vacanam bruuyaat mat vaakya bala coditaH || 1-59-8
tat sarvam akhilena uktam mama aakhyeyam anaadR^itam |

" 'If someone speaks inconsiderately incited by the forcefulness of my word, whoever speaks it, whichever word it may be, all that is to be reported to me, whatever it is.' Thus Vishvamitra ordered his disciples. [1-59-8]

tasya tat vacanam shrutvaa disho jagmuH tat aaj~nayaa || 1-59-9
aajagmuH atha deshebhyaH sarvebhyo brahma vaadinaH |

"On listening that word of Vishvamitra his disciples went to all directions inviting all by his order, and then the Vedic scholars started to arrive from all provinces. [1-59-9 b, 10a]

te ca shiSyaaH samaagamya munim jvalita tejasam || 1-59-10
uucuH ca vacanam sarve sarveSaam brahma vaadinaam |

"All of the disciples have returned to the fulgently resplendent sage Vishvamitra, and reported the words spoken by all the Vedic scholars. [1-59-10b, 11a]

shrutvaa te vacanam sarve samaayaanti dvijaatayaH || 1-59-11
sarva desheSu ca agacChan varjayitvaa mahaaudayam |

" 'On listening your word all the Brahmans from all provinces have started to come and some have already come, leaving alone Mahodaya, the son of Vashishta.' Thus, the disciples have started to inform Vishvamitra. [1-59-11b, 12a]

vaasiSTham tat shatam sarvam krodha paryaakula akSaram || 1-59-12
yathaa aaha vacanam sarvam shR^iNu tvam muni pu.ngava |

" 'What all said by those hundred sons of Vashishta is explosively worded in their fury, oh, eminent sage, and what all they have said that you may please listen. [1-59-12b, 13a]

kSatriyo yaajako yasya caNDaalasya visheSataH || 1-59-13
katham sadasi bhoktaaro haviH tasya sura R^iSayaH |

" 'A Kshatriya is the officiator, and a profaner is the performer. How then the gods or sages can partake of the remnants of oblations in that ritual-assembly, especially that of a profaner?' Thus, the sons of Vashishta exclaimed. [1-59-13b, 14a]

braahmaNaa vaa mahaatmaano bhuktvaa caNDaala bhojanam || 1-59-14
katham svargam gamiSyanti vishvaamitreNa paalitaaH |

14b, 15a. vishvaamitreNa paalitaaH= by Vishvamitra, [even though] ruled over [rather, embarrassed]; mahaatmaanaH braahmaNaa vaa= great-souled [sages,] Brahmans, either; caNDaala bhojanam bhuktvaa= profaner's, food, by partaking of; svargam katham gamiSyanti= to heavens, how, they go.

" 'Though the Brahmans or the high-souled sages are now embarrassed by Vishvamitra, how can they go to heaven even after their demise, partaking of the food of a profaner? [1-59-14b, 15a]

etat vacanam naiSThuryam uucuH sa.mrakta locanaaH || 1-59-15
vaasiSThaa muni shaarduula sarve saha mahodayaaH |

" 'Oh, tigerly sage Vishvamitra, all the sons of Vashishta including Mahodaya spoke these derisive sentences with their eyes reddening in anger.' Thus, the disciples reported to Vishvamitra. [1-59-15b, 16a]

So, in summary, Vishvaamitra who had not yet attained the rank of a brahmin, was rebuffed by Vaisishta's sons because it was inappropriate for him to perfrom the yagna due to his kshatriya status.

Wickedness is not a license of being anything. Duryodhana only wanted to be the king and targeted Pandavs for this.

So let me see if I'm understanding this correctly. According to you, one's varna is based on ones qualities and actions at any given time. Yet, if a person is wicked and engages in evil deeds like murder, this does not change his varna?

Just being bad to some don't make him non-kShatriya unless he quit his warrior life, he fought till end, this was his kShatriya lifestyle.

This misses serious facts that Drona and Ashvatthaama were born in the clan of Bhardwaja, who himself was from the same clan that of Valmiki and also a disciple of Valmiki. Both Drona and Ashvatthaama were jobless and they were employed by Duryodhana as his lieutenants.

Then by the logic above, why are Drona and Ashvatthama brahmins? They quit their brahmin life and took to the lives of kshatriyas. Do you realize that your position is inconsistent? Please review the above two quotes by you.

How can anyone say his life was "specifically" spared on this account? Ashvatthaama was disqualified and banished.

Please see bhAgavata purANa, 1st skandha, 7th adhyAya:

SB 1.7.34� After binding Aśvatthāmā, Arjuna wanted to take him to the military camp. The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa, looking on with His lotus eyes, spoke to Arjuna in an angry mood.
SB 1.7.35� Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa said: O Arjuna, you should not show mercy by releasing this relative of a brāhmaṇa [brahma-bandhu], for he has killed innocent boys in their sleep.
SB 1.7.36� A person who knows the principles of religion does not kill an enemy who is careless, intoxicated, insane, asleep, afraid or devoid of his chariot. Nor does he kill a boy, a woman, a foolish creature or a surrendered soul.
SB 1.7.37� A cruel and wretched person who maintains his existence at the cost of others� lives deserves to be killed for his own well-being, otherwise he will go down by his own actions.
SB 1.7.38� Furthermore, I have personally heard you promise Draupadī that you would bring forth the head of the killer of her sons.
SB 1.7.39� This man is an assassin and murderer of your own family members. Not only that, but he has also dissatisfied his master. He is but the burnt remnants of his family. Kill him immediately.
SB 1.7.40� Sūta Gosvāmī said: Although Kṛṣṇa, who was examining Arjuna in religion, encouraged Arjuna to kill the son of Droṇācārya, Arjuna, a great soul, did not like the idea of killing him, although Aśvatthāmā was a heinous murderer of Arjuna�s family members.
SB 1.7.41� After reaching his own camp, Arjuna, along with his dear friend and charioteer [Śrī Kṛṣṇa], entrusted the murderer unto his dear wife, who was lamenting for her murdered sons.
SB 1.7.42� Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī said: Draupadī then saw Aśvatthāmā, who was bound with ropes like an animal and silent for having enacted the most inglorious murder. Due to her female nature, and due to her being naturally good and well-behaved, she showed him due respects as a brāhmaṇa.
SB 1.7.43� She could not tolerate Aśvatthāmā�s being bound by ropes, and being a devoted lady, she said: Release him, release him, for he is a brāhmaṇa, our spiritual master.
SB 1.7.44� It was by Droṇācārya�s mercy that you learned the military art of throwing arrows and the confidential art of controlling weapons.
SB 1.7.45� He [Droṇācārya] is certainly still existing, being represented by his son. His wife Kṛpī did not undergo a satī with him because she had a son.
SB 1.7.46� O most fortunate one who know the principles of religion, it is not good for you to cause grief to glorious family members who are always respectable and worshipful.
SB 1.7.47� My lord, do not make the wife of Droṇācārya cry like me. I am aggrieved for the death of my sons. She need not cry constantly like me.
SB 1.7.48� If the kingly administrative order, being unrestricted in sense control, offends the brāhmaṇa order and enrages them, then the fire of that rage burns up the whole body of the royal family and brings grief upon them all.
SB 1.7.49� Sūta Gosvāmī said: O brāhmaṇas, King Yudhiṣṭhira fully supported the statements of the Queen, which were in accordance with the principles of religion and were justified, glorious, full of mercy and equity, and without duplicity.
SB 1.7.50� Nakula and Sahadeva [the younger brothers of the King] and also Sātyaki, Arjuna, the Personality of Godhead Lord Sri Kṛṣṇa, son of Devakī, and the ladies and others all unanimously agreed with the King.
SB 1.7.51� Bhīma, however, angrily disagreed with them and recommended killing this culprit, who had murdered sleeping children for no purpose and for neither his nor his master�s interest.
SB 1.7.52� Caturbhuja [the four-armed one], or the Personality of Godhead, after hearing the words of Bhīma, Draupadī and others, saw the face of His dear friend Arjuna, and He began to speak as if smiling.
SB 1.7.53-54� The Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa said: A friend of a brāhmaṇa is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor he must be killed. All these rulings are in the scriptures, and you should act accordingly. You have to fulfill your promise to your wife, and you must also act to the satisfaction of Bhīmasena and Me.
SB 1.7.55� Sūta Gosvāmī said: Just then Arjuna could understand the motive of the Lord by His equivocal orders, and thus with his sword he severed both hair and jewel from the head of Aśvatthāmā.
SB 1.7.56� He [Aśvatthāmā] had already lost his bodily luster due to infanticide, and now, moreover, having lost the jewel from his head, he lost even more strength. Thus he was unbound and driven out of the camp.
SB 1.7.57� Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for the relative of a brāhmaṇa. There is no injunction for killing the body.

So, in summary, Ashvatthaama was spared the death sentence because he was a brahmin. This is in spite of the fact that he had committed murder.

regards,

[dhyandev]

_/\_
somegot got offended?The more u get offended the more u introspect & more good things come out from urself.
Please be offended

[PARAM]

Please refer to vAlmIki-rAmAyaNa,bAla-kANDa, 59th sarga:

So, in summary, Vishvaamitra who had not yet attained the rank of a brahmin, was rebuffed by Vaisishta's sons because it was inappropriate for him to perfrom the yagna due to his kshatriya status.

Big wrong and for a very sad thing is you completely missed conflict and friendship of Vashishtha and Vishwamitra. You read only cursory but not the inner thing. When Brahma himself accepted Vishvamitra as a Brahmin, there you have to understand this, do sons of Vashitha know more than Brahma himself?
There was enmity between Vishwamitra and sons of Vashishtha that was started when Vishwamitra wanted to took away Nandini. And secondly nobody can take mortal body to heaven because death is a must for everyone, King Trishanku wanted to make this possible and Vishwamitra agreed to help him, this was unreasonable. Even sons of Vashishta did not perform any such Yajna for themselves or any other Brahmin.


Referring to rAmAyaNa, what made anyone to claim that Vishwamitra's Yajna was not accepted to Vashishtha, isn't it was Vashishtha himself who supported Vishwamitra's Yajna and made reluctant Dhasaratha to accept Vishwamitra's demand of sending Ram to protect his Yajna?

Bhagwan Ram know laws of Dharma better or you, isn't Bhagwan Ram himself supported Vishwamitra's Yajna instead of questioning it?

So let me see if I'm understanding this correctly. According to you, one's varna is based on ones qualities and actions at any given time. Yet, if a person is wicked and engages in evil deeds like murder, this does not change his varna?

Ultimately it is guna-karma-swabhava that will detemine the varna and not paap or punya. A paap or puna is done and doer will be punished or rewarded for this.

Evil deeds like murder cannot abolish action titles, nobody is 100% good but this is not the end. Duryodhan was a warrior and not a coward, he was not anti Vedas, so he cannot be described as Asura, he was not an illiterate servant to be described as Shudra. His respect to his parents, his true friendship qualities, and his support to Vedas with his action of warrior all this makes him a pure kShatriya.

Then by the logic above, why are Drona and Ashvatthama brahmins? They quit their brahmin life and took to the lives of kshatriyas. Do you realize that your position is inconsistent? Please review the above two quotes by you.

Said already you did not have any question, Drona and Ashvatthama both were poor, but never worked as kShatriya so they were not kShatriyas. They participated in only Mahabharat war and that too they were employed by Duryodhana for being capable of warfare.
If we accept that birth is the Varna quality then they must be a race, and what condition made Bheesham to employ Kripacharya and Dronacharya for the education of Pandavs and Kauravas when he was himself capable in doing so? Read Vidur's great vaani, he was born ShUdra but he was a minister and worked as Brahmin, read the conversion of Sanjay (Karna's father and Dhritrashtra).

Please see bhAgavata purANa, 1st skandha, 7th adhyAya:

So, in summary, Ashvatthaama was spared the death sentence because he was a brahmin. This is in spite of the fact that he had committed murder.

Why not Sauptika Parva of mahabharata itself? Where it is clearly mentioned Ashvatthaama was banished.


You missed why Dronacharya was not spared? bhAgavata purANa talks about various deeds of Krishna for life and many quotes are added in later parts. If Krishna spared him then what was the real accounts when Krishna was a kShatriya?

Also lookout what happened when Gandhari cursed Krishna, when Dhritrashtra tried to kill Bheema, what were the special accounts that made Pandavs and Krishna to spare them when they too were involved in the grief of Pandavas?

Ashvatthaama and Kritvarma were Brahmins but Kritvarma was a kShatriya, all of them spared in one account, so what was Kritvarma's account?

_/\_
somegot got offended?The more u get offended the more u introspect & more good things come out from urself.
Please be offended

Its Islamic+Christian+Communist claims over Dharma Grantham to offend Dharmiks.
Action of BraHmaN - Support DhaRMa, promote the truth and expose the untruth.
Action of kShaTriYa - Fight for DhaRMa and attack the aDhaRMa.
Action of VaiShYa - Help DhaRMa and make aDhaRMa helpless.
Action of ShUdRa - Serve DhaRMa and no service to aDhaRMa.
but
Action of ASURa - aDhaRMa