1 points | Post submitted by suyash95 119 days ago | 30 comments
| viewed 214 times
Does Hinduism still discriminate on the basis of caste?
Hinduism is not a person it is a whole culture.
The question should be “Do Hindus still discriminate on the basis of caste?”
There are two major forms of caste discrimination since ancient times and they relate to two things:– feed and marriage.
So the answer is yes, some Hindus still discriminate on the basis of caste.
Out of India is much less obviously evident but there may still be some misgivings about children’s partners.
Most of the weddings I conduct are not only inter-caste, inter-ethnic (different Indian language groups) but also inter-racial - and in 95% of the cases the parents are on board and supportive of the project - caring only for their children's happiness.
This is the Spanish casta system used in New Spain. It was based on the concept of the purity of blood (limpieza de sangre) of the inhabitants of New Spain.Unfortunately, bhāratīya-varṇāśrama has become mired with the baggage of the Iberian casta system.
Drug use & alcoholism was a cope that the amerindian resorted to in an increasingly unhappy & unfair world. A telling quote - “The Spanish rebuked and penalized the indio for not being a European while at the same time making it impossible for him to become a true European”
Not at all. The ārya-varṇāśrama was a religious system that had nothing to do with blood ancestry or "race" Arya did not care about skin color or race. In fact Vedic Arya Brāhmaṇas desired dark skin offsprings in 900-1000 BCE.
It is parochial to project modern notions of race or skin color obsession on the ancients. They simply did not care. In fact, even in Latin Europe in the early middle ages - the primary demarcator of peoplehood was language (lingua gentem facit) "language makes race"
On the other hand. the Spanish casta system led to complete cut-off all mixed castes from civilized society. This made them social lepers & plunged them into banditry and violence, drug addictionIn India, "low castes" were Emperors & Kings. Or Poets. Does this sound comparable?
Meanwhile, in India - the so called "dalit castes" rose up to ranks as sophisticated and cultured as being court poets of Emperor Harshavardhana. One of the 9 jewels of his court.
Emperor Harsha (c.606 – c. 647 CE) had a Cāṇḍāla "dalit" court poet named Mātaṅga Divākara in his court.The poet was apparently quite famous for being a Cāṇḍāla who had become renown. Rajaśekhara (9th CE) mentions him. His poetry is quoted in सुभाषितावली of वल्लभदेव.
India isn't America,Hindus aren't white, and Dalits aren’t“Black and brown people.”Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma is an identity thatpredates “race,” just as it predates America, and the sin of slavery, and theidea of nations and the Christian and Muslim faiths.
Same idea of color identity is beginning 2 b used by 'casteoppression' activists in US, both Indian origin n American, even though colorhas nothing to do wid caste. But since American wokedom infiltrating everythingn everyone lets them understand just one thing-color, it works Dalit Pantherswas modelled after Black Panthers. - "Racist Algorithm" narrative inthe West is being mapped as "Casteist Algorithm" in India. - Agencieslike Equality Labs are working overtime to mass Pavlovian-train westerners intoassociating India with "caste oppression." In the West, they'rediscovering ever newer forms of "systemic-racism" on the basis ofsome super-lame criteria each day & revising its meaning with it. Littlewould a layman know that its not nuance, it's chaos. An analogous academicmalpractice has hit India vis-a-vis caste.
The standard state propaganda is that the caste faultlineswithin the Hindu Fold is natural whereas the Hindu vs Muslim conflict is aBritish conspiracy. The truth is the precise opposite. How many inter casteconflicts can Historians name before the British came?
Al beruni said - that “much, however, as these classes differ from each other, theylive together in the same towns and villages, mixed together in the same housesand lodgings”. Another acquired another’s trait; they became rigid and losttheir mobility. All mobility was now downward.
H. A. Rose (1867 – 1933), Superintendent of Ethnography, Punjab,from 1901 to 1906, author of A Glossary of Punjab Tribes and Castes, says thatduring Muslim period, many Rajputs were degraded and they became scheduledcastes and scheduled tribes. Many of them still retain
Rajput gotra of Parihara & Parimara.Similarly, G. W. Briggs in his The Chamars, tells us that many Chamars stillcarry names and gotra of Rajput clans like Banaudhiya, Ujjaini, Chandhariya,Sarwariya, Kanaujiya, Chauhan, Chadel, Saksena, Sakarwar; Bhardarauiya, andBundela, etc
Dr K. S. Lal cites many similar instances in his recent Growth ofScheduled Tribes and Castes in Medieval India. The same is true of Bhangis.William Crooke (1848 – 1923) of Bengal Civil Service tells us that the “rise ofthe present Bhangi caste seems, from the names applied
to the castes and its subdivisions, to date from the early periodof Mohammedan rule”. Old Hindu literature mentions no Bhangis of presentfunction. In traditional Hindu rural society, he was a corn-measurer, a villagepoliceman, a custodian of village boundaries. But scavenging
came along with the Muslim and British rule. Their numbers alsomultiplied. According to 1901 Census, the Bhangis were most numerous in thePunjab and the United Provinces which were the heartland of Muslim domination.Then came the British who treated all Hindus equally all
an inferior race—and fuelled their internal differences. Theyattacked Hinduism but cultivated the caste principle, two sides of the samecoin. Hinduism had to be attacked. It gave India the principles of unity andcontinuity; it was also India’s definition at its deepest.
It held together castes as well as the country. Take away Hinduismand the country was easily subdued. Caste in old India was a cooperative andcultural principle; but it is now being turned into a principle of socialconflict. In the old dispensation, castes followed dharma
and its restraints; they knew how far they could go. But now acaste is a law unto itself; it knows no self-restraint except the restraint puton it by another class engaged in similar self-aggrandisement. The newself-styled social justice intellectuals and parties do not want
an India without castes, they want castes without Dharma. This maybe profitable to some in the short run but it is suicidal for all in the longrun. In the old days, castes had leaders who represented the culture of theland, Who were natural leaders of their people and were
organic to them. But now a different leadership is coming to thefore: rootless, demagogic and ambitious, which uses caste slogans forself-aggrandisement.
HINDUISM does not degrade lower castes but in practice it does, a natural consequence of itsleadership being over-represented by upper castes who promote their ownsocio-economical and political interests. It is human nature — everyone seekstheir own interests. Thus it is time the RSS leadership has a big shakeup atthe top.
IMP POINT on CASTE SYSTEM
4000-5000 years while they existed average life was 30
there were many ruling dynasties esp insouth india that weren’t kshatriya but lower castes. for all intents andpurposes, after ascending the throne any caste is essentially kshatriya.careful, your caste supremacy is showing
“Dalit” isn’t even a word in Hinduismand all the manufactured Dalit narratives and Ambedkarite garbage has no realworld implications and is just political limbo-jumbo. they rarely have anythingto do with real world persecution.
This is hindinized version of termDepressed. The term Depressed was used for the first time in Indian Census 1881and prior to this earlier term was Outcast which you can find in Indian Census1872. Outcast were nothing but anyone from any jaati. .
The jaati system andthe Varna system is/was the most inclusive and empowering system everdeveloped. Christian colonialists ranted against it since it wouldn't allowcolonial exploitation, chaddis rant against it because they are brainless. Thejaati/varna system guaranteed zerounemployment, made monopolies impossible, and made everyone an entrepreneur ata proper young age.
Nobody was allowed to intrude into theoccupation of somebody else, everyone was given a profession. Imagine asituation where amazon types are not allowed to get into retail. Expand that amillion times. It also guaranteed excellence of the kind that ITI diplomascan't achieve
The restrictions thatthe Scheduled Communities faced in India, indefensible and inhuman as theywere, are entirely different in their context and development. An apt parallelto study would have been the people of defiled trades and dishonourableprofessions in Europe, including the untouchable communities like Cagots.
Historian Kathy Stuartpoints out that in pre-modern Europe, 'throughout the Holy Roman empire,dishonourable tradesmen suffered various forms of social, economic, legal, andpolitical discrimination on a graduated scale of dishonour at the hands of‘‘honorable’’ guild artisans and in ‘‘honorable’’ society at large' and thenshe points out that 'dishonor was transmitted through heredity, often overseveral generations. The polluting quality of dishonor is one of its definingcharacteristics.' (Defiled Trades and Social Outcasts, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp.2-3).As late as 17th century, when a rich Cagot dared to ‘pollute’ an upper castewater font his hand was chopped off and pinned to the Church gate.
It would have provideda fascinating account to see how those caste systems became irrelevant becauseof the genocidal colonial exploitation of other societies. Perhaps studyingpossible discrimination even today against those with higher native-Britongenetic markers as against those with increased Anglo-Saxon ones may revealequally amusing yet relevant results for the problem in hand.
castes in Jewishsociety: Kohenim or Cohanim, Lebiim and Israelites with Cohanim being thehighest castes and Israelites just ordinary people.
Surnames like Cohen,Kagan, Kahn, Katz etc. are mostly Cohanim surnames and middle caste surnamesare Levy, Levin. Landau, Horowqitz etc.
More often than not,surnames can allow one to know the relations like a man with Cohanim surnamecannot be related through paternal lines to a man born to the Leviim orIsraelite castes. (Gary Mokotoff, 'Jewish American Research' in 'The Source: A Guidebook to American Genealogy' (Ed. Szucz& Luebking), AncestryPublishing, 2006 p.766). Here is an example of a culture and a nation whereorthodox ‘caste’ can coexist with the most progressive modernity.
It would have been quiteinteresting if one had studied how the traditional 'caste' system of the NativeAmerican nation could absorb different races into their 'caste' system asagainst the clearly hierarchical, injustice-laden Protestant caste system,which gets compared with the Hindu social system.
varna and jati have more complex roots than such pillars.
Let us consider Tamil Nadu.There are three SC communities: Paraiar, so-called Pallar and Arundathiyar.
Pariar also have the name Sambavar or Siva Sambavar and theyrelate themselves to Shiva. In fact, the Sri Lalita Sahasranama hasthe name Sambhavi andtraditional commentary explains that as the mother of Sambavas.
The so-called Pallar name became dominant and fixed mostlyduring the colonial times. Their own traditional name is Devendrar.
Today, they have started demanding, based on pre-colonialhistorical documents, that they be taken out of the SC list. They have firstrights in ceremonies of some of the major Hindu temples in Tamil Nadu. Thatsuch a people were made SC because of colonial interventions, shows thecomplexities involved here.
Chakliyar is a derogatory name but their traditional name isArundathiyar- a name associated with one of the most venerated women in theHindu tradition.
the religious texts ofIndia which have been popular among Hindus, unlike the Smritis which mostly belonged to the legal scholarsand were not religious texts as such, repeatedly insisted that socialstratification should be given up.
The Mahabharata repeatedly speaks of Brahmin nature asarising not from birth but from one’s conduct and character. The Bhagavad Gita yet again reinforces the same. In the case ofthe so-called divine sanction, for every Smriti statement allowing birth-baseddivision, there are literally thousand other references which reject suchdivisions and insist on inherent oneness of humanity and all existence.
In the case ofheritability, we have entire communities moving out of one occupation to becomeanother.
For example, Shudrashave become Kshatriyas; similarly, Brahmin communities had become ScheduledCommunities. So here is actually a paradoxical twist: In the West, the parallelcaste structure estate was more secularly rooted than the Hindu jati-varna system. But historically, this providedan advantage to Hindu jatis in socialmobility – particularly during the pre-colonial period.
Jamaican poet andsocial anthropologist Michael Garfield Smith (1921-1993) had pointed out thisaspect of Hindu jati and it needs tobe quoted at some length:
The feudalorganization of medieval Europe and Japan also rested on fairly generalconsensus and habituation. ... None the less, these estate systems differsharply from caste. Ritual heredity differentiates castes but in estatesystems, hereditary differences are secular in base and referents. While castecan accommodate secular ranking as a secondary local stratification, inmedieval Europe, ritual stratification was itself indirectly dependent on birthdifferences of a secular nature. Under caste, secular relations among rankedcastes are rather variable; and instances of Sudras acquiring Kshatriya statusby virtue of their territorial and military dominance are well known. In thesecular estate system, the political bases are correlates of stratification arefixed and clear. Members of superior strata exercise jurisdiction over membersof inferior ones, individually and collectively. ... In Europe, besides stratadifferentiated by birth and political status, the nobility was also dividedbetween church and state. In the secular sphere, nobles competed for titles,land and power against rivals also qualified for this competition by birth; inthe ritual sphere, birth status was qualified by secondary emphasis on learnedclerical skills.
‘Corporations and Society: Social Anthropology of CollectiveAction‘, Transaction Publishers, 2017, 1974:2009, p.156)
The sacred thread isneither a privilege nor does it belong to Brahmins alone.
Many communities wearit. Some of them are potters, some of them merchants, some carpenters, someweavers, some warriors, some Valluvars – the priestly class of astronomers fromthe Pariah community and also the Brahmin jatis.
It is a colonial mythand today it is perpetuated by the academia, media and a strong section of thepolity, that the sacred thread is a symbol of Brahmins and so-calledBrahminism.
Then there arepersistent Hindu traditions of Brahmins derived from the fishing community –sometimes presented with a poetic flourish that the sacred thread for theBrahmins were derived from their fishing nets.
Again, one of the mostsacred and most popular of the Hindu texts, the Srimad Bhagavatam, clearly states that it is when thesociety is depraved that a person gets identified as a Brahmin because of histhread (and not his character).
While many non-Brahmincommunities wear the sacred thread, colonial essentializing of sacred thread asBrahminical symbol has resulted in hate imagery - likening Brahmins to pigs andschemers.
From the PuranicParasurama to Sri Ramanuja Acharya to Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, the sacredthread has been given to any communities desiring to become Brahmins and anyindividual desiring the sacred thread.
It takes enormousamount of ignorance and cultural illiteracy to claim superiority based on thewearing of sacred thread. But such narratives make good marketing.
Duryodhana says that shūdra-s from Bharukaccha (modern day Bharuch) gave many lavish gifts worthy of Brāhmaṇa-s to Yuddhisthira. They must have been very wealthy, for they gave:1) Gandharan horses2) Ranku antelope skins3) 100,000 slave girls from Karpasika
शतं दासीसहस्राणां कार्पासिकनिवासिनाम् श्यामास्तन्व्यो दीर्घकेश्यो हेमाभरणभूषिताःशूद्रा विप्रोत्तमार्हाणि राङ्कवान्यजिनानि चबलिं च कृत्स्नमादाय भरुकच्छनिवासिनः उपनिन्युर्महाराज हयान्गान्धारदेशजान्
"The Shudras living in Bharuach gave as tribute 100,000 slave girls of the karpasika country - with their dark complexion, long hair and decorated with gold ornaments. They also gave horses born in Gandhara & hides of the Ranku antelope. They gave gifts worthy of brahmins"
We can also see from this that historically, some Shudra groups were quite wealthy. Rich artisans, manufacturers, builders etc.
Shūdra-s are NOT prohibited from wearing the sacred-thread (yajñopavīta). This is a common misconception as only the vaidika-upanayana is known to most people. Shūdra have upavītādhikāra by āgamika-pramāṇaThe kāmikāgama clearly says that shūdra-s & mixed-castes also wear Janeu
It is not the same rite as that in the manusmṛti but that's besides the point. The point is the āgamikopavīta rite exists for shaivadīkṣita shūdra-s & anyamiśrajāti.क्षत्रविट्छूद्र जातिनां यदुक्तम् चोपवीतकम्पूजादि मन्त्रकाले तु धार्यन्नो धार्यमेव वाTranslation..+
The lack of honest effort for basic research leads to the mistake that; ‘the prohibition of ‘upanayana’ ceremony means prohibition of education.’Those who commit this mistake, could read about a ceremony called Vidyārambha, which is open to all varṇas
A detailed description of this ceremony is mentioned in Saṃskāradīpikā, where a typical line which is attributed to Mārkaṇḍeya is explained. The line says that in the ceremony, one is to honour one’s ‘vidyā’ and also one’s ‘vidyāsūtrakāras
The author says that ‘vidyā’ means the field of study, which includes ‘nyāya’ (logic), ‘vaiśeṣika’, ‘sāṅkhya’ and ‘yoga’ etc. This ceremony is mentioned also in the specific text made regarding Shudras, i.e., Śūdrakamalākara of Kamalākarabhaṭṭa (same verse is mentioned).
The William Adam’s report (years 1835–38) on the elementary Bengali schools (pp. 137–138, as quoted on page 273 of ‘The beautiful tree’ by Dharampal’), mentions a ceremony where a child is initiated into reading and writing at the age of 5.
This tradition could also explain the mention of ‘Soodra’ students (also the ‘all other castes’ which may as well include those below them) in the reports of British officials cited in Dharampal’s book ‘The Beautiful Tree
Claim - so only vedas etc cdnt be learnt without upanayana if i'm not wrong
Response - It seems that they could be learnt, which is why Aśvaghoṣa in his Vajrasūcī mentions Śūdras who're experts Vedas. Bhṛtakādhyāpakas used to teach Vedas in lieu of fee (as mentioned by Medhātithi in ManuS 3.156). Vācaspatimiśra in his Bhāmatīvyākhyā
on Brahmasūtraśāṅkarabhāṣya (1.3.34) refutes a pūrvapakṣa which says that Śūdras could learn Vedas without upanayana, through studying books. He refutes it by saying that it won't lead to the fruit which the dvijas get after studying Vedas duly via upanayana.
the idea of the upavita as a symbol of brahmin exclusivism is mired in sociological and religious ignorance.
The sacred thread declared to be worn by the kṣatriyas, vaiśyas, shūdras etc must be worn at times of pūja or mantra incantation""The thread is to be made of cotton (karpāsa). Shūdra-s wear one thread, Vaiśyas were two. Kṣatriyas wear three. Brāhmaṇā wear 7, 5 or 9 th
some shUdrAchara texts prescribe a paurANika upanayana for lay sat-shUdras not affiliated with a particular sampradAya.reads"
Claim - Caste fluidity is impossible because Smartas (such as the Shankaracharyas) say it isn't.
Response - A large chunk of Indian population doesn’t believe him but the constitution, which makes a social construct hereditary rigid. Some campaigns for caste fluidity is must.
Marxist sociologists explain the evolution of caste as a result of growing division of labour with the rise of agriculture and private property. They blame Brahmins for providing the legitimacy to this system by justifying it using religious concepts.
The peculiar feature of Indian society in which Jati (caste) system was the fundamental modal of socioeconomic organisation, its sustenance in the rural areas could only be ensured by Yajmani (also spelled Jajmani) system which was intricately intertwined with Jati system. In Yajmani system, the Jatis which were engaged in providing different services and products were integrated with the Jatis which were primarily agriculture producers or performed administrative activities. The discussion in subsequent paragraphs of Yajmani system will be restricted to rural areas where it is still in existence to some extent.
To understand the Yajmani system, we will start with the most common example of how the system works for someone who belongs to a Jati engaged in agriculture. A person engaged in agriculture needs different kind of services for religious and secular activities – iron ploughs for ploughing the land, bullock cart for carrying loads, leather straps for tying oxen to specific wooden implants during ploughing, service of Brahmans for conducting a wedding or any another samskara, pitchers for storing water in summer, service of barbers for regular and specific events such as death or wedding etc. In the Jati system, each of these products and services were provided by specific Jatis who specialized in their own domains.
In Yajmani system, each of the required products and services to a household was provided by the designated members of different Jatis. For example, if A needs iron ploughs, B from Luhar (blacksmith) Jati will provide the required product. The interesting thing to note here is that B has traditionally inherited A as his patron, which he is not allowed to change nor A has the option of going to a different vendor. When B passes away, his offsprings will inherit the same business relationship with the offsprings of A. It was a patron-client model in which the relationship was transmitted across generations where both the parties had guarantee of the relationship.
In this model, the mode of payment for the services and products varied on multiple factors. It was dependent on the geography, occupation of the patron and the nature of service. If the patron belonged to agricultural Jati, the payment was made after the main season of harvest in form of grains. In Eastern India, the payment was usually done using rice as it was the main cereal for the region. The amount of payment varied on the basis of nature of services rendered. Jatis which provided products used to calculate their expected payment on the basis of kind of products which they had delivered in a specific year while Jatis which provided services had a fixed payment and additional payments for specific activities. For example, a barber was given fixed amount of grains every year irrespective of the volume of services provided, but if he had also provided his services for a wedding during the year, he received an additional payment for that service.
The Yajmani system which we have described above differs greatly from the employer-employee model of the industrial world. Unlike employer-employee model, Yajmani system adopted a hereditary model in which the business relationship was carried forward across generations. In this system, if a patron was not happy with the quality of services or products rendered, he didn’t have the easier option of changing the vendor. If he wished to change the vendor, no other vendor would be ready to provide him the services as it will create a conflict amongst the members of their own Jati and violate the fundamental norm of not encroaching in the territory of fellow members of the community.
In the employer-employee model, the employer is free to terminate the employment of the employees based on the terms and conditions associated with the employment as opposed to the Yajmani system. While in pre-industrial world, the system ensured stability of the socioeconomic order as economic transactions were intimately connected with the social relationships, it took away the incentive to be entrepreneurial and innovative. As the producers or service providers were assured of definite base of patrons, they had no incentive to innovate as there was no additional reward associated with it. The chances of gaining an additional patron were slim owing to the social norms and the potential patron already having their own service providers. Having said that, Yajmani system was a functional social institution in a world where there was no clear difference between economic and social relationships and they often converged.
Dr J K Bajaj, India’s foremost demographer and scholar in his research, offers some conclusions which he shared with this author. In the same Ganga-Yamuna belt (or North India, broadly speaking) there is not a single village or town that has remained in the same place for more than four hundred years. In his study travels, Dr Bajaj found only one village near Hissar, Haryana, which remained intact for more than six hundred or so years. He also found that this village almost exactly resembled a typical South Indian village in terms of its plan and layout: for example, where and how the temple, water bodies, burial grounds, fields and farmland, boundaries, etc should be located. This was completely unlike any typical North Indian village falling in the entire stretch between Punjab to Bihar to Bengal.
To understand the impact of temple destructions which played a key role in shaping today's Caste system, it is important to understand what’s known as the Rooted Indian psyche. This can be more accurately called the attitude of the Hindu soul: an inseparability from Sampradaya. An honest study of Hindu history and culture shows that this psyche is a deep attachment to said Sampradaya and the intimacy that their immediate physical surrounding provides them. Unless violently forced, Hindus typically never moved out of their villages for generations. Of course, the jaundiced critic may call this attitude as frog-in-the-well but that discussion is beyond the scope of this essay.
Amongst the many concepts of equality, probably the most widely known and accepted concept of equality is ‘equality of opportunity’. Equality of opportunity in the fundamental sense means a type of society in which all the positions available in the society should be open to everyone and the means to occupy that position should also be open to everyone. This is generally known as formal equality of opportunity and another variant of its is known as substantive equality of opportunity in which special provisions are made to ensure level playing fields amongst the people. We will first discuss the format equality of opportunity before moving to the substantive one.
The fundamental assumption behind the equality of opportunity is that it accepts the existence of hierarchies in the society. It recognizes the fact that there exists special posts in the society which confer certain special benefits on the people occupying those posts. The reason for the existence of hierarchies can be biological, social or political. To understand it in simple way, let’s take the example of a parliamentary democracy in which PM has special privileges. Proponents of formal equality of opportunity in absolute sense would say that anyone should be eligible to contest for the post of PM who is a member of that political society or citizens. But does it happen in the reality? One needs to fulfill requirements related to minimum age, not being convicted for certain types of criminal offences etc. even though it’s open to everyone theoretically. If we are imposing a criterion of minimum age, aren’t we violating the concept of non-discrimination on the basis of biological factors? One way to resolve this conflict is to argue that since everyone would theoretically cross the minimum age threshold at some point of time, it’s not really a form of discrimination.
Equality of opportunity is often contrasted against traditional societies in which public posts were not open to everyone and the ones who were born in specific families had distinct advantages. When the son of military general was chosen to succeed his father, it was a case of eligibility of certain posts being decided on birth than merit. It’s tempting to ask here if having a democratic society is prerequisite to enforce formal equality of opportunity. I had read a Twitter thread written by a propaganda handle of Chinese Communist Party arguing that China practices its own nature of democracy based on equality of opportunity. His argument was that every Chinese citizen to free to join Chinese Communist Party, rise through the hierarchy and occupy the top position. So, even in a totalitarian political system, if the position of dictator is theoretically open to everyone without any restrictions on birth, gender or race, it will still conform to the ideals of equality of opportunity.
Over the time, it was realized that formal equality of opportunity was not enough. It was not enough because even if the available posts are open to everyone, everyone is not equipped to compete on equal terms owing to their different socioeconomic status. For example, if there are two students A and B who have equal aptitude in Maths, Physics and Chemistry while A is born in a family of professor while B is born in a family of peasant, does both of them have equal opportunity to qualify for IITs? IITs just require you to clear JEE Mains and Advanced. Proponents of substantive equality of opportunity will tell that A has advantage over B owing to his socioeconomic status and special measures are needed to ensure that A and B have equal opportunity.
The role of state in enforcing formal equality of opportunity was limited, but the state has to take additional steps to ensure substantive equality of opportunity. There is also another challenge of differences in not only individuals but amongst the groups. In India, it was reasoned that certain castes suffer from social and economic backwardness and they can compete with other castes on equal terms only when they’re given special privileges. Hence, reservation was given to them to achieve substantive equality of opportunity. In US, affirmative action was implemented to have quota for some racial groups such as Blacks and Hispanics.
What was the traditional justification for why chandalas were not allowed in temples (temple, caste system, varna, untouchability, shudra, Hinduism)?
Chandalas traditionally engaged in work which was considered defiling in the extreme - such as scavenging, disposing of dead animals and humans, and acting as executioners. Their domestic circumstances were also unhygienic and they were known to keep and eat dogs and to brew and consume large quantities of toddy.
In the light of modern science - people who work with dead bodies and decomposing and decaying matter develop a strong immunity and can sometimes be carriers of hepatitis and other pathogens. At the time, the bacterial and viral cause of diseases was unknown but cross-contamination and infection was suspected and hence social distancing implemented especially in temples which tend to be crowded places.
The sacred thread declared to be worn by the kṣatriyas, vaiśyas, shūdras etc must be worn at times of pūja or mantra incantation""The thread is to be made of cotton (karpāsa). Shūdra-s wear one thread, Vaiśyas were two. Kṣatriyas wear three. Brāhmaṇā wear 7, 5 or 9 threads"
All varṇa-s can wear it. There are just different upanayana rites. Source: (Kāmika Agama 3.89-90) Recitation of diff mantras are also prescribed to each jāti to wear the mantra. (Kāmika Agama 3.101)
The caste system as it exists today is the result of developments during the collapse of the Mughal era and the rise of the British colonial government in India. The British Raj furthered this development, making RIGID caste organisation a central mechanism of administration. Between 1860 and 1920, the British formulated the caste system into their system of governance, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to Christians and people belonging to certain castes.
The caste system is one of the main expressions of the traditional sociopolitical order, a “form" victorious over chaos and the embodiment of the metaphysical ideas of stability and justice."
This continuous seething over caste system is nothing but acknowledgement of their defeat by votaries of egalitarianism as differences between classes have only increased in last century and they show their desperation by insulting or abusing hindu caste system wh
the purest form of a hierarchy based system. And these maniacs consider Brahmins who stand at the top of this system as their mortal enemy.
Traditional baniya businessman: Profit > scale, builds business from saving, हरि भक्ति and doing charity for Dharma.Modern start-up founders: Thrives on VC money, can't make profits so scale > profit, gives retarded hot takes about Indian society and people.
The worst thing which you could do to a kid coming from poor economic background is to reduce the standard of education for him. You're ensuring that he will fail where it matters because his standard was kept below compared to his peers for compassion.
In 1950-51, the percentage of workers engaged in agriculture was 82%. What does it essentially say? That majority of Indians including LC Hindus were living on agriculture by the time British left.
Around 30% of the rural households in 1950-51 came in the category of agriculture labour and further 15% of it were landless labourers. An agriculture labour household meant that it received more than 50% of its income from agriculture labour.
So, not only majority of Hindu LCs were dependent on agriculture but a significant number of them didn't produce enough to sustain themselves due to which agriculture labour was their prime vocation. The ones who didn't own land had no other options anyway.
The manufacturing sector had mix presence of both bigger and SME firms. But even there, the owners were from business class as they had started modernization within their capacity to boost their production and productivity.
The service castes were in even more pitiable condition because the wage in service sector was low as a consequence of lower economic development. If he remained there, he couldn't progress as everyone else was poor. So, whenever he got the opportunity, he took up another job.
As a consequence of industrialization and British colonialism, by 1947, India was essentially a country of landless poor who sustained on agriculture somehow. It was just enough to keep oneself alive.
In such dire situation, people left their villages and families behind to find something better. Many found, many didn't. But had they not tried something, nothing better would have come. Giving a haircut in Bangalore is profitable today, it's still peanuts in villages.
Another thing which people need to understand is that a skilled worker is not necessarily a good entrepreneur. Hindu LCs traditionally had skills, but didn't venture into running business. Modern economy is different. Running the business is the most important skill today.
Why do Hindus support and practice the caste system?
How do Hindu “practice the caste system”?
Caste was based on occupation which was family/community based and was originally formulated for an agriculture based society so there were only four vocations - governance, priests, farmers and labourers.
The majority of Hindus today choose any number of thousands of professions and vocations unrelated to the original four divisions. So how do they “practice the caste-system”?
What you probably mean is “why do some Hindus discriminate against others based on their names or the vocations of their ancestors?”
It’s a good question - you will need to specifically ask those who do discriminate. The same goes for all discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality, class or caste or whatever other characteristic.
I am a Hindu priest and I do not discriminate against anyone for any reason.
Traditionally, are Brahmins not meant to work as employees beneath someone else?
Brahmins also work as employees under wealthy Sudras that build and control temples which employ them.
Since the Middle Ages and the decline of the Vedic Yajñas under the patronage of kings and wealthy merchants, Sudras - particularly the land-owners and the primary producers of valued commodities became the nouveau riche - and the Brahmins began extending their sacerdotal services to them as well.
So today the majority of the patrons of the Brahmins who are still practicing their traditional occupation of priesthood are Sudras - a thing which is condemned by the earlier Dharma Shastras.
The goal of Amvedkarites is not to uplift the lower classes..The goal is to maintain a permanent state of conflict so the lower classes become dependent on them.
The problem of caste and exclusion. I have my own misgivings with that itself. Population density and diversity determines everything.China has density but not diversity. Diversity keeps people from mixing too much
Why do u think?Saudi is near Africa. If they let down endogamy/consanguinity, they fear that African genes will enter their system in no time!Diversity determines the ease with which we mix.More than 90% of Chinese are ethnically similar. Han Chinese. They don't have this
problem.Diversity keeps people from mixing.What makes you think caste is a choice? You enlightened people want people to make different choices.What if it's not a choice? What if it's an inevitability?So....there is the real issue of caste, which I'm not refuting.
Caste system itself is not the problem here.Chettiar+Mudaliar+Pillai have been blaming Brahmins for creating caste system and inequality and untouchability and practically every evil in their society!!!
They took this word, 'brahminism' and gave it a definition. Its defined as "the feeling that my caste is superior to that caste"They said that this feeling originated from the Brahmins, and was passed on to all others in
the society, and this was how eventually the whole society became casteistDo you agree w/ that too?People just get stuck discussing the actual problems, failing to see the malice in #drav
Dravidianism is defined as "the counter to brahminism/Aryanism, which is characterized by dividing people into castes at birth, and as oppression of lowers castes and women".
Until 19th century in India, there was a group of selfless scholarly Brahmins whose job was treating people during Pandemic.They used to travel village to village & vaccinate everyone without ever caring for their personal safety. Their failure rate was just one in a million!
The British banned these Brahmins and their profession in 1861.The banning led to an increase of smallpox epidemics and plague in 20th century.This is how traditional health ecosystem was destroyed during the modern colonization era. And such institutions never recovered!
Screenshots excerpted from Susantha Goonatilake's "Toward a global science : mining civilizational knowledge" who inturn quotes Dharmapal's citation of Holwell's report
Compare the jaati system of Hindu India where everyone had a profession guaranteed from birth into which no one else could encroach, where everyone became an entrepreneur at puberty with the current system.
Everyone had their duties & responsibilities pretty well defined. The transfer of knowledge via generations led to prosperity & expansion of boundaries in every field.
Buddhism ended up creating a previously never existed class called "chandalas" aka "panchama varna" also known as "Dalit". Buddhist punishments were too harsh .. such as social expulsion for "crimes" as simple as having a glass of alcohol or a taking bite of meat.
After 1857 War of Independence, the British demonised the various communities of people who could prove obstacles to their rule in future, through institutional mechanisms. As long as we continue using those mechanisms & associated propaganda, we aren't truly decolonised!
Industrial revolution took away the traditional artisan, etc. jobs, which traditionally Shudras did. To exploit this disenfranchisement further, missionaries exaggerated anti-Shudra things in the Smritis & sought to encourage conversions.
Automation is repeating the process of obscuring traditional occupations.
Criminal Tribes Act. A group of people can be arbitrarily tagged as a criminal tribe, they can be moved to a reservation, their children can be forcibly snatched from them and they have no right to question. Were there mass graves? Who knows?
Now, some details over the same. It is legally sanctioned to establish reservations and your presence there is mandatory just because someone declared that you are born a criminal. And to cure you, they can snatch your children and reform them.
Though the 1924 Criminal Tribes Act says you can be snatched from your parents when you are as young as 8 years, it's even worse before.
What do they do with your children? They will be reformed and they will be sent as bonded labour once they turn 14.
Now, what is reformation, you may ask. I will come to that later, but reformation is repentance of your life as being born as a criminal. You get the hang, right?
Now, who are these criminal tribes? In simplest terms, those who resisted the British occupation/those who suffered because of the British dominance in India. Let me give you some examples.
Erukala is a Telugu tribe which lived on transporting goods. Railways came and their donkeys lost prominence. British blocked access to forests, they can't make mats and brooms. Street acrobatics not allowed because they can foment rebellions. What should they do for a living?
Kallar is a Tamil tribe. They were traditional soldiers. When the kingdoms fell, what should they do for a living? And because they supported the Palayakkars, they were tagged as a criminal tribe.
Even the Palayakkars were tagged under a single tribe and tagged as a Criminal Tribe!!
This is a curious case. I feel this is more about a particular influential person whose house is burgled than about a whole tribe being criminal. Whole of Andhra knows how hardworking Malas and Madigas are. By the way, Madigas are also tagged as a criminal tribe.
Religious hatred. Because you refused conversions and attacked missionaries, you are a Criminal Tribe.
Now, one may ask, these are just paper laws. Where is the proof they are implemented? It looks like Criminal Tribes Act stopped the British from ratifying the Convention on Forced or Compulsory Labour!!\
There are both urban penal colonies for them and rural reservations for them. Note the comments “In this State there are about 55 more villages in which Criminal Tribes members are settled ”
Even as late as 1949, the need for settlements is discussed.
So, what does Church say on this? Criminocurology, a book published by Salvation Army on this topic notes,
They did extensive operations inside these reservations. Any parent refusing his child to be converted, the child will be forcibly taken away - they have the legal backing to do that.
These are some hard truths we Indians need to focus on - not much literature is present on this topic and there should be dedicated works dealing with each and every caste - how they were before the Criminal Tribes Act, what they had to go through, and how they are now.
It is shameful that a person is converted by saying you are born a criminal and only god can redeem you. I am sure many will be offended when you say that to them. But, that's the hard truth our ancestors had to go through. They were violently uprooted from their homes and taken
away to some faraway settlement with which they had no connect whatsoever - cultural, linguistic or lifestyle-related. The children they loved were snatched from them for conversions and slave labour and they weren't able to do anything. Just think of the pain they went throug.
The stigma still stays because these words enter regular parlance. Dommari is a caste. Dommari is a cuss word in Telugu. Why did it become a cuss word in Telugu? Can you ever undo it?
Another example is the village of Stuartpuram near Guntur which became legendary for criminals. Why? Because that's were a Criminal Tribe is herded to and left without any resources for decades.
Frankly to speak, Erukala were nothing more than cheap labour. Ignore the Brown Coolie narrative that it's the Indian upper castes which pioneered this. The fact lies that these people were herded just because they don't cost.
It's immaterial whether what Macaulay said is real or fake. But the truth is, the same was done to India - by picking anyone who resisted the British and calling them as born criminals. What best way than to convert the children of their toughest opponents to christianity?
2 important points
1. You only can claim constitutional rights from State not person
2. She spoke about her comfortabilty and choice, not discriminationSit down
Shaming the UC people in becoming Cucks like yourself isn't going to solve the problem.Reservation only promotes more casteism.Reservation should only be provided on the basis of financial condition NOT caste.
SIMPLY TO FIT IN A CERTAIN GROUP AND TO SIMPLY SOUND WOKE AND INTELLECTUAL, OR JUST PROGRESSIVE, WHICH ARE 3 DIFFERENT THINGS. ALL THAT THEY KNOW IS FROM BOOKS WRITTEN AND PEER REVIEWED BY THEIR OWN CLAN. TO KNOW WHO REALLY ARE DEPRIVED, U HAVE TO VISIT INDIA, THE REAL INDIA\
It is also important to address the following1. Ur UC friends are no way responsible for the doings of the past2. Mixing religion with ur caste identity is useless3. Caste based reservation eventually provides u economic benefits only4. Question ur DALIT leaders than UC ally
CONSTITUTIONAL MERITOCRACY is my right, irrespective of UC, SC or ST
EQUITY is to be impartial to all. CASTE based reservation is contradictory to this notion as it is a form of "ethnic discrimination" and it is actually biased towards dominant classes of backward class. The core idea is benevolent, but in practice is DISCRIMINATORY.
it is discriminatory towards the real BAHUJANS who should be the real beneficiaries of it. Rather it is misused by the financially stable dominant classes of backward caste. The real OPPRESSORS are ur Dalit leaders who have filled u with Enmity for the UCs
Scientific benefits of Endogamy?
Cons: Increased chances of disabilityPros (Controversial): Heritability of Genetic Traits, like IQ is one of the most heritable trait proven scientifically. So for high achieving groups, little incentives to marry outside.
Endogamy only becomes a problem if the population of the endogamous tribe / group is too low. Or else there'll be enough diversity in genetics to sustain the practice perpetually. The argument supporting endogamy is quite simple really, let's consider a varna, brāhmanās +
The population of Brāhmanās in India is about 60 million. Imagine a world with just 60 million humans running around. It will definitely be possible for the 60 million strong population to grow into a substantial number without virtually any genetic issues.
Just a google search away is the topic of "minimum viable population". 50/500 rule, where 50 minimum unrelated individuals are required to avoid inbreeding, and 500 individuals are required to reduce genetic drift. I think endogamy won't ever be a problem, 60 mn strong too.
बड़ा विषय है किसी चर्चा में ही जान पाओगे Human genome Mutated gene Ova & sperm (रज & वीर्य)memory इसके हिसाब से जानना पड़ेगा'
अगर वर्णसंकरता नहीं आयी गोत्र के नियम का पालन हुआ है तो हम ही हमारे पूर्वज है अगर विचार करे तो
Endogamy in modern context is a tradition of getting married within one's own limits of a local community, clan or a tribe.
Race mixing causes faster regression to the mean. This increases survivability by averaging out any unique traits but also makes the progeny mediocre.A civilization's elite are almost always from the 'pure-bred' stock.Wonder why Ashkenazi elite are strictly endogamous?
Your bigotry doesn’t allow others to have their food preferences? Or are only white “woke” people can have “gluten free” “lactose free” “keto” and so on.Your slavery and ignorance go hand in hand. There is a science of prana and gunas . Some foods are tamasic, lower energy.
Hierarchies will always exist. Hierarchies decide upon the competence and value of person. You can only be valuable when you do something better than everybody else, that inevitably leads to a hierarchy in that particular domain.
When you want to eradicate a hierarchy you must establish equal standing in all categories. Equal standing means everybody has equal value. Equal value = Zero value. Because there is no measure of scale to compare against.
Reminds of, When Rick converted the global currency to zero. (fictional) Rekt.
Caste diversity was there in pre modern India too, in fact the diversity was greater but it didn't lead to so much conflict as it does in our times. What changed ??
Because the avenues of competition as well as rewards were limited except for extremely motivated ones who were ready to pay the heavy price of conflict. That always happened at individual or small group level. Things have radically change now for good.
The old time mindset was completely different. Most of the people were happy doing what their ancestors did because they didn't know how to do something else, nor they thought they were capable of doing. Even if someone was in misery, he accepted it as fate.
Caste system has nothing to do with racism and if you are probably not aware, both Indian and Western liberals are obsessed with caste system to take it down. What you are saying is not unpopular, but completely incorrect.
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 >>>>
Blog (new) | Hindi Site | Guidelines | FAQ | Security | Privacy | About and Contact
Hindu Media Wiki is a Resource sharing and discussion site for followers of the Hindu religion and those interested in learning more about Hinduism.