Re: Law of Manu - Caste System
Originally Posted by
PARAM
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?
Pranams,
Obviously, you have never read the unabridged Ramayana, so let me fill you in on some historical details. Brahma's acceptance of Vishvamitra as a brahmin occurred *after* Trisanku-yagna. When the sons of Vishvamitra declined to attend Vishvamitra's yagna, it was prior to his brahmin status. Their comments were very clear in the text - they did not acknowledge Vishvamitra as a brahmin at that time despite his austerities and his willingness and ability to perform the yagna. Hence, your theory that one's quality and actions at any given time reflect his varna stands refuted.
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?
Again, you obviously do not know the text. This occurred chronologically *after* Brahma's pronouncement of Vishvamitra's brahminical status. Prior to that, while performing austerities, Vashishtha did not accept him as a brahmin despite his penance which was so austere that it threatened the devas.
Bhagwan Ram know laws of Dharma better or you, isn't Bhagwan Ram himself supported Vishwamitra's Yajna instead of questioning it?
Ram had nothing to do with the Trisanku-yagna. The yagna he protected occurred after Brahma's pronouncement that Vishvamitra was now a brahmin. Please consult the text and inform yourself of the facts.
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.
Everyone should take note of the astonishingly inconsistent and highly backbending explanation being offered here. According to Param et. al., one's current qualities and actions determine one's varna. Yet, in spite of this theory, a person can commit evil acts like murder and still his varna does not change. How is this significantly different from the casteism you claim to criticize? Either varna is dynamic or it is not. Claiming that guna and karma can change it, and then claiming that murder or other criminal activity does not, is inconsistent.
Note also Param's view in which he equates "illiterate servant" with "shudra." There is no such description in the canonical texts, and as such, his view is both wrong and offensive.
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.
Your knowledge of Mahabharata appears to be based on what you watched on television serials and not on the original text, so let me fill you in on some details. First, Drona was engaged in warfare long before his employment by Duryodhana. He was first employed by Bhishma and the other Hastinapur elders to teach the fighting arts to the Pandavas and Kauravas when they were still young. Even at that time, Drona was already known as a master of arms. Later, as his guru-dakshina, he employed the Pandavas to fight with his friend Drupada over an insult and conquered the latter's kingdom, returning half of it later. This was all before the Mahabharata war. In fact, the Mahabharat does not document a history of Drona performing yagnas and other activities appropriate to a brahmin. Yet, he is always referred to as a brahmin despite his vengeful motivation and primarily military activities. So once again, this refutes your theory.
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).
But neither Vidura nor Sanjaya were referred to as belonging to a varna other than that of their birth. What these examples show is that greatness is a function of one's good deeds and bhakti, and are often independent of one's birth. It does not follow however, that great deeds make you exempt from the varna of your birth.
Why not Sauptika Parva of mahabharata itself? Where it is clearly mentioned Ashvatthaama was banished.
... but not killed, despite committing murder which normally merits a death sentence. Why wasn't he executed? Answer: Because he was a brahmin as stated in the Bhagavata Purana.
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.
You are quite mistaken, and you are simply repeating a secular academic view with no understanding of the facts. The reality is that the Bhagavatam enjoys greater acceptance as pramana than the Mahabharata. In regards to the latter, Madhvacharya noted that it contained numerous interpolations. The Bhagavatam has far fewer changes.
If Krishna spared him then what was the real accounts when Krishna was a kShatriya?
Krishna did not spare or kill Drona. Drona was killed by Drishtadyumna, the son of Drupada, as an act of revenge for Drona's conquering Drupada's kingdom.
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?
None of it is relevant to the fact that Ashvatthama was specifically spared on account of his being a brahmin.
Ashvatthaama and Kritvarma were Brahmins but Kritvarma was a kShatriya, all of them spared in one account, so what was Kritvarma's account?
Kritavarma was a kshatriya and he was killed later in Dwaraka. He also was not the one caught by Arjuna after the murder.
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
Did Duryodhana fight for dharma? Was he ever regarded as anything other than kshatriya? I rest my case.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
Bookmarks