7 points | Post submitted by suyash95 259 days ago | 2 comments
| viewed 134 times
Regarding Construction of Hinduism Dharma as a religion,a very important point was missed,Quran n Bibile are the eternal word of the Almighty and omniscient creator who revealed it to his prophet and Son and a copy of it is kept in heaven. One author, one recipient – eternal.
But in Hinduism,the Main Text VEDAS which are four volumes, the first being the Rig Veda, are the semantic poetic compilations of meditating humans — 329 Rishis (m) and 27 Rishikas (f). Compiled over 5000 years ago and transmitted orally since then till now. They are insights into ultimate reality they are the human aspiration towards the Absolute – not a revelation, command and control from top down
The Caste system as a Theory was constructed during Colonial regimes and later propagated by Marxists is based on a Famous PURUSA SUKTA of RigVeda which is composed by One RISHI.Now here is the interesting part-
There were hundreds of Vedic Acharyas and Vedic schools - they did not all agree on every point.For every 3 Indians you meet even today-they will have at least 5 different opinions! It has always been thus on the sub-continent. The argumentative Indian is axiomatic!
So what happened-
There are hundreds of Hindu scriptures that are now lost permanently.
To start, the Vedic corpus available to us now is probably 10% of the original extant.
This post covers this in most detail-
Different Hindu Gurus had diffrent views-
for eg - Guru Gorakhnath who said regarding VARNA
The four varna are perceived to be located in the nature of the individual, i.e. Brahmana in sadacara
(righteous conduct), Ksatriya in saurya (valor and courage), Vaisya in vyavasaya (business),
and Sudra in seva (service).A yogin experiences all men and women of all races and castes within himself. Therefore he has no hatred for anybody. He has love for every being.
Gorakhnath, Siddha Siddhanta Paddhati III 6-8
Like this,Vedic Hindus had differeing views regading VARNA,Hinduism accepts differences of opinion, belief, practice and is accommodating of diversity and inclusivity.
Eg – Some Vedic Gurus taught that Varna was by Birth,This has been percolated by Colonial Indologists as Hinduism ‘s sole view.But noticeable thing is Other Vedic Gurus had different view.
This Post covers this
Unnlike Islam n Christianity-In Hinduism
There was no one in charge, no organizing body no supervisors, no moderators, no authority figures, no controllers - everything just happens, functions like an organic unit and then overnight dismantles and decamps . It has no founder and no management structure, or Central Command and Control syndicate. Gurus were all independent and their authority derives from those devotees who trusted in them and supported them financially.Jaatis were symbiotic n not in a hierarchy
There were many Classifications in Hinduism-.Current Hinduism is divided into 3 forms-Vedic,Agamic and Tantric –
With the arrival of Tantric n Agamic Hinduism,Vedic Hinduism declined
In Vedic Hinduism-A person was classified as Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya,Sudra which were basically 4 metaphysical qualities present in every person.
The Colonial Translators and later Marxists interpreted Varnas as denoting race instead of Quality.
BRAHMINS were never a monolithic block. -There were 10 kinds of Brāhmanas:known in DharmaShastras. Deva-Brāhmana (the archetype) to Dvija-Brāhmana (student of Vedanta) to Paśu-Brāhmana (one only proud of his birth & janeu, but nothing to show for it) to Chandala-Brāhmana (one who is adharmic, asuric, wicked and cruel). Even there were SUDRA BRAHMINS. Source: PV Kane's History of Dharmśastras Volume 2 Part 1, pg 131 on the discourse in the Atri Smriti.
Western Theories while making claims on Brahminism miss a very important point-Brahmins were not a monolithic block. There were Vedic,Tantric,Muni,Agamic(Temple Priests),Mahapatra Brahmins etc
BUT in TANTRIC Hinduism which compises of Shaivism,Shaktism,Vaishnavism on which the modern Hinduism is based on has different classification than Vedic system altogether
According to In TANTRA, all people can be divided into 3 categories:
1. The pashus — or vast majority of common people who are basically insecure, fearful and
undisciplined who crave the fulfilment of desires and assurances of safety and security. They are
easily manipulated and controlled by secular as well as religious authority figures.
2. The viras — the heroic, pathfinders, explorers and adventurers. People who are intelligent, self
assured and have a burning desire to find out and to achieve goals for themselves. They are the
intelligentsia, the scientists and the explorers.
3. The siddhas — the enlightened beings.
There was no CASTE System.This was a Colonial construction.The Hindu Varna-Jaati System was fluid,flexible,interdependent.
Eg - Cattle rearing was a Vaishya occupation but historical evidence clearly showed that Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Shudras also owned and reared cattle and that cattle-wealth was mainstay of their households. 19th century British records show that Chamars,who are now listed under Scheduled Castes also owned land and cattle and were active agriculturalists.
Ancient Buddhist texts mention Varna system in South Asia, but the details suggest that it was a non-rigid, flexible and with characteristics devoid of features of a social stratification system
Peter Masefield,a Buddhism scholar and ancient Pali texts translator, states that during the Nikāya texts period of Buddhism (3rd century BC to 5th century AD), Varna as a class system is attested, but the described Varna was not a caste system. The Pali texts enumerate the four Varnas Brahmin, "Kshatriya",Vessa (Vaishya) and Sudda (Shudra).
Masefield notes that people in any Varna could in principle perform any profession. The early Buddhist texts, for instance, identify some Brahmins to be farmers and in other professions. The text state that anyone, of any birth, could perform the priestly function,and that the Brahmin took food from anyone, suggesting that strictures of commensality were as yet unknown. The Nikaya texts also imply that endogamy was not mandated in ancient India. Masefield concludes, "if any form of caste system was known during the Nikaya period - and it is doubtful that it was - this was in all probability restricted to certain non-Aryan groups"
HUNA INVASION - HUNS WERE CENTRAL ASIATIC Tribes,They came n invaded India.Unlike in Europe and Persia where Huns were shunned, Indian civilization civilized & adopted Hunas.From Toramana onwards, they stopped calling themselves "Alchon" on their coins. Toramana became a Aaishnava and issued Garuda coins. His son Mihirakula was a devout Shaivite.Huns became so thoroughly Hinduised that they started calling themselves Kshatriya and ruled according to Dharmashastras.
This is eg of-there was no cental org. giving certificates of Varna status to people,Many Jaatis laid claim to Kshatriya status like Huns.There was no one in charge, no organizing body no supervisors, no moderators, no authority figures, no controllers - everything just happened, functioned like an organic unit and then overnight dismantled and decamped.Hinduism had no founder and no management structure, or Central Command and Control syndicate. Gurus were all independent and their authority derived from those devotees who trusted in them and supported them financially..Jaatis were symbiotic n not in a hierarchy,This is a Marxist Construct .JAATIS had ups,downs.There was also frequent intermarriages between JAATIS.The present stagnation is becoz of long Muslim n British Rule which greatly affected Hindu JAATIS due to which intermarriages stopped.
the absence of a central authority was the main reason for the survival of Hinduism despite centuries of terror and genocide? Hindus were notorious for their lack of religious bureaucracy and indifference to the religious practices of others and since there are no compulsory catechisms to study, daily masses and confessions to attend and no way to test or to monitor the knowledge of dogma and practices of the converted it would be impossible to forcibly convert anyone. There has never been a clerical hierarchy like in Christianity and the Brahmin priests have had zero power over the masses and even less interest to forcing them to become generic Hindus.
The varna-jati system was extremely complicated and there were different permutations and intersectionality.All of the Dharma Shastras presented a social hierarchy. This is the THEORY, in practice things were different and there was a complex web of interdependence.Most JATIS also followed Khsatriya Dharma, used to practice weapon arts in morning because they had to deal with pirates and robbers during their trades.All throughout history , many tribes and groups have 'achieved' kshatriyahood by the simple expedient of taking up arms and seizing power.For example the Holkar Maharaja of indore ( malharrao Holkar started life in the dhangar , sheperd community.The Sudra kings were — Mahapadma Nanda, Mauryas, Palas, Marathasthere was no cental org. giving certificates of Varna status to people,Many Jaatis laid claim to Kshatriya status like Huns.White Huns were invaders from Central Asia.
In the ancient times,If a person was not allowed entry in any temple or access to water resources,he could have very easily approached his RAJA. The Hindu Rajas built temples for people constructed water resources for well beingof people, The cases of denying temple entry access to water resources is a veryrecent trend in 1800'sWhen Islamic n British rule destroyed all Traditional Hindu Rajas,devastated India.JAATIS had ups,downs.There was also frequent intermarriages between JAATIS.The present stagnation is becoz of long Muslim n British Rule which greatly affected Hindu JAATIS due to which intermarriages stopped.
INDIA was never a Law based society,Becoz There was no Central Organization enforcing rules in India.
Marxists often dig deep in Hindu Texts to find some obscure verse regarding caste n gender and than use them as Law rules to attack Hinduism
These laws are 2000 years old(Modern Estimates) to 12000 years old(From Hindu Estimates). They need to be compared to the laws of other nations at that time. We cannot compare today’s values with those of a millennia ago.
200 years ago the English were hanging people who stole a goose to feed their starving children - and Irish women were transported to Australia for 7 years for stealing potatoes to feed their starving children - who were then abandoned on the streets.
Bedlam was an insane asylum which for a fee would admit tourists to laugh and mock the insane.
Hindu law, like all law is subject to interpretation by lawyers. Lawyers argue about the fine print of the text and decisions are made even on the placement of a comma.
Hindu laws were interpreted according to the hermeneutic principles of the Mīmāṁsa and certainly there is a lot of flexibility. Unfortunately or perhaps fortunately
the British were the final arbitrators in the civil law in India and marriage, divorce, inheritance, torts etc came under the jurisdiction of the civil authorities.
Also the other factor is that all matters pertaining to these matters was settled by the JAATI panchayats on the basis of Custom and Usage and not Dharma Shastra.
So in the absence of the High Court of Dharma Shastra there were no avenues of appeal and the decisions of the panchayat were final.
Hence today we have this unholy confusion and tragedy with women being forced to remain in abusive relationships or being forced to marry against their wills etc.. etc.
Most Westernised Hindus have a problem reconciling with concepts like Marriage n Divorce in Hinduism.
Divorce is a western concept - it is the formal certificate issued by a court of Law which cancels the original Marriage Certificate which was also issued by the court.
No sampradaya in India has ever issued marriage certificates or marriage licenses and therefore no sampradaya issues a divorce certificate either.
WHAT ABOUT SHUDRAS ??
You have misunderstood the concept of Shudratva and are seeing it only in a class context.Even a Brahmin is a SHUDRA A Shudra is a person who serves others and since everyone of us is a servant to another in some capacity or other we are all Shudras - especially when that service is a livelihood and source of income. Even politicians and presidents are public SERVANTS - they are elected by the public to serve the public and therefore they are all Shudras.It was during British rule that Christianity converted the word,gave it a wrong connotation.Eg-Christianity did the same thing in Europe.Christianity burned living Women in thousands calling them Witches. The Word Witch was not a bad word . It simply meant Wise woman at that time.But Christianity twisted the meaning of this word,associated them with Devil n destroyed that Knowledge of Institution, It did the same thing with word SHUDRA,gave it a wrong connnotation,One should know that The VATICAN had a whole propaganda department which used to do propaganda in favour of Christianity.What damage they did in India still remains unknown.
Take this verse - If he (a Shudra) listens intentionally to (a recitation of) the Veda, his ears shall be filled with (molten) tin or lac. If he recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out. If he remembers them, his body shall be split in twain.
I once asked if anyone can produce any news report in the last 200 or 2000 years (from any Foreign Traveller,British,Islamic Historian’s account) of Brahmin pouring lead (which is mentioned in Manusmriti )into someone's ears and the silence was like lead in my ears. There is not a Single Foreign Travellers account who has mentioned or noticed any thing about it in his Travel Journals.Britishers made a complete fool of Hindus by inserting this n many other things in Hindu Texts to denigrate them for Converting into Christianity. This is the SAME BIAS that was practiced in what the whites, christians, muslims ,"intellectuals" & seculars used to succeed that the Colonial British rule abolished Sati (the practice of burning the widow on her husbands pyre) in India, when they reported signing sending the mercennories into Bengal who "worked hard & helped the british abolish the practice by making a law declaring the practice illegal in bengal, where as in reality, only 4 cases had occurrd in last 400-500 years. This has been WELL DOCUMENTED by Meenakshi JAin, a HISTORIAN, in her book "Sati: Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse
The worst exhibits of the "caste system" has been the stereotype of the controlling zamindar, heaping inequities over hapless "lower caste" peasants. But zamindari is not a traditional Hindu institution at all. It comes from Islamic & British rule, made much worse by the latter.
As the rapacious British rule consolidated power, and especially after the First War of Independence in 1857, it created a narrative of what I call #BlameShift. In this narrative war, it shifted the deprivation caused by its own enormous loot and barbarity to "Hindu culture."
‘Upper caste’ Is Brit translation of ‘Oonchi Zat’ from Mughal era. High status by job value to Mughal Zamindari Tax system. Risley’s idea to map Zat to 4 levels & assign Sanskrit labels: Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Mo would’ve been as valid. #risleycaste more accurate name 4 admin system.
The peasants overwhelmingly supported the First War of Independence in 1857 by all means possible.This has irked British so much that they empowered criminals to collect exhorbitant taxes from farmers & even empowered them to grab defaulters' lands. They titled them 'Zamindars'
Vast amount of atrocity literature was produced. The exploitative revenue system instituted by the British was blamed on "caste." Their robbing widows of rights and pensions, and resulting protests, were blame-shifted to "sati.
Their enforcement of patriarchal land-ownership rights (women in Britain could still not own property) meant the British State would confiscate your land if you did not have a male heir. The resultant male child preference was was blame-shifted to Hindu "female infanticide."
The Hindu tradition of 'stridhan" literally the wealth of women, passed from mother to daughter, was mapped to the patriarchal European institution of "dowry." Loss of status of women in India due to transferable land ownership to male-only heirs was mapped to "dowry atrocities"
The traditional education system was dismantled, and this narrative was implanted in the new generation of colonized Indians, particularly the ruling classes and the bureaucrats. The worst of European serfdom and blood-based artistocracy was grafted onto India as "caste system."
European Colonization was justified by the fabrication of the "Aryan Invasion Theory"—"upper caste Hindus" were themselves colonizers, so there was nothing wrong with the British rule. There is no textual, epigraphic or archaeological evidence for AIT.
Welcome to HMW!
This site is for discussion about Hinduism.
You must have an account here to participate.
Register here >>>>
We do NOT offer personalized advice based on astrology.
Check the Guidelines for posting >>>>
Hindu Media Wiki is a Resource sharing and discussion site for followers of the Hindu religion and those interested in learning more about Hinduism.
Hindi Site | Guidelines | FAQ | Security | Privacy | About and Contact