m

THEORIES N TERMS BEHIND CASTE SYSTEM History of Hindu Religion

1 points | Post submitted by suyash95 8 days ago | 6 comments | viewed 68 times

Caste System is associated with terms like - InEquality , Hierarchy , Discrimination , Privilege ,Mobility ,Oppression, Hereditary ,Endogamy ,Purity/Impurity etc.


  • suyash95 8 days ago | +0 points

    INDIA’s Caste System is associated with terms like - InEquality , Hierarchy , Discrimination , Privilege ,Mobility ,Oppression, Hereditary ,Endogamy ,Purity/Impurity etc. Let us discuss

    We each have areas of specialization, or at least turf we’re comfortable on. Your interest in explaining caste using the genetic lens is valuable. But drawing large narratives from this with a high degree of accuracy perhaps needs an in depth study of Indian history and Hinduism.

    Indians don’t reject the existence of endogamous groups, but rather question the notion of systemic oppression and “casteism” prior to colonization. Western misinterpretation of “jaati” as “caste” disingenuously claims an ossified top down stratification of society and power.How do we define social status?

    Often, Brahmins were priests and teachers, rarely controlling wealth and political power. Vaishyas generated wealth but did not teach beyond their trade. Kshatriyas did not engage in business or teach, but administered and ruled.

    Farmers, according Megasthenes, “were not interfered with during wartime [by the military].” Usually, war affects the marginalized and those low down the social order the most, but we do not see it here.

    It was also noted that at the time Indica was written, Indian society did not have a culture of employing indentured or slave labor. That is despite having a societal structure which had seven “castes.”

    Those who had no possessions, studied and renounced the world - sanyasis/ascetics - were held in the highest regard. Irrespective of jaati, individuals could move from Brahmacharya (early education) > Grihastha (family) Vanaprastha (retirement/advisory) > Sanyasa (renunciation)

    A lot can be inferred from genetics. It’s equally important to examine endogamous groupings within the larger context of the prevalent culture of the time. Just as all tradition of the past don’t have to fit today’s moral code, neither do prevalent notions of class superiority.

    Funny how a “dasi dancer” in 12th century earned more than a priest & still the priest “oppressed her”

    I still don’t get how that conclusion is drawn when most well-heeled oppression olympians of today often practice endogamy themselves.

    Nobody said that there are no jati groups.

    A particular meta level description of a bunch of groups interacting in a bunch a ways ('system') is what gets questioned.

    (Caste 'system')

    Why is this distinction so hard to

    understand—Object vs description of object.

    Brahmin refers to brahminical occupations- any jati can do this.Any group can make its temple n practise brahminical occupations but it cannot force other group to interdine n intermarry on the basis of that.Every group has its rights , choices n preferences like the sentinelese tribes in andaman islands. This is where theories of caste system n discrimination fall flat apart

    This is especially rich because a lot of medieval scholars are uncomfortable using the F word (feudalism) anymore. If we can appreciate that observable social distinctions were not quite as rigid as we thought in our own societies, it seems odd to insist on it for India.

    Any number of such example in natural sciences where new theory superscedes an old one precisely because it deals inadequately with phenomena. Yet in the case of India we cling to debunked theories of 18th cent indologists of the caste "system".

    Caste is just a set of traditions. Any other view on caste should explain why GSB, SB and RSB split into separate castes when they fled Portuguese Goa inquisition. Or why Madhvas and Smartas don't intermarry despite identical DNA, rituals, diet and geography.

    Or why multiple castes came together to form vokkaliga and Lingayat castes. Or how caste leaders choose to merge with other castes as done with various SB groups.

    jati is a set of traditions and the best way to pass on traditions is via family. This is the primary reason castes are endogamous. You cannot analyze caste with a Brahmin/Dalit binary, look at the interaction of close castes to understand it: Iyer v Iyengar, N v S Kshatriya etc.

    Looks like this malady of using "science" to cont to perpetuate colonial narratives is the new game these guys play. Indian society was ergodic. Sai Deepak cites the case of Tamil "pariahs" who were a Brahmin community once. Econ determined much of movement up/down social strata

    Claim-Dalit settlements on fringes of villages were not established by colonialists.

    Response - Feudal societies lived like that without bothering one another. Even in European societies the cobblers, butcherers lived on the outskirts of the society. Looking at it from modern lens won't prove Indian society was any more bad. U trying too hard.Also fringes of villages* this itself is an exhagerattion. Different communities lived in their own specific part of towns without bothering one another. Colonialists did far worse things but it doesn't matter to brown sepoys.

    Is it impossible to imagine that communities may have been built around professions and these communities provided individuals with necessary safety nets in the absence of a State? It happens everywhere especially in royal families (much more hardline with cousin marriages).

    Caste/Jati = Endogamous occupational groups is certainly old.

    But when people say “caste” they mean caste discrimination, which is certainly Brit created, due to destruction and impoverishment of artisan class and laws like CriminaI Tribes act etc.

    Countries with population a fraction of the Indian subcontinent/Hindu civilisation are simply not able to grasp that a large population will organise itself into smaller units.

    They are just bewildered and make up bizzzare theories !!

    Social stratification in the UK which no one talks about:

    https://t.co/94xPZhZr5l

    Endogamy cannot be equivalent to oppression. For example, prevalnce of slave wives in Islamic societies bought or looted from others, if genetically studied amongst progeny after a few generations, cannot be a proof of an open and diverse society based on genetic studies.

    Why don't Indian textbooks mention this of "caste" in Europe?

    "Droit du seigneur, (French: “right of the lord”), a feudal right that existed in medieval Europe giving the lord the right to sleep the first night with the bride of any one of his vassals." (Encyclopedia Britannica)

    Also is this one reason there is more genetic uniformity in Europe?

    Later, a requirement called the culagium involved payment of a fee to the feudal lord for permission to marriage. This served as a tax on the serfs. The Church also demanded payment of a fee to get the couple out of a three day waiting period before consummating their union.

    Here's how you explain the "caste system" back to the Europeans. When Indians arrived in Europe in the 17th century, we found bricklayers, coal miners, coach drivers and sailors, the four original Castes of Britain. But then we found Russians, Frenchmen, Germans and Poles. The confusion came about when we tried to fit the Russians into the four original Castes. There were Russians who were bricklayers and coal miners, the Poles who were coal miners, coach drivers and sailors. However the French were mainly bricklayers, with some sailors. The choice was between fitting them into one of the four original Castes, or creating new Castes like Russian, French, German and Pole. This is precisely the kind of discussions in the colonial administration in the lead up to the census enumeration of 1871-72, when they first introduced Castes into India.

    SCRIPTURAL BASIS -

    Reading scriptures is no criteria of oppression. These scriptures are very hard to study and the person required to study them had to make sacrifices. The thing is that specialised learning can't be attained through general purpose bootcamps. Add to that shortage of resources, the tyranny of distance and low life expectancty in a closed pre-Industrial economy, the only way to produce an optimum number of learners is to heredetirze the activity. The anyone can be anyone approach is actually a leading cause of terrible wastage of time and money. Without it, not only would 99.99% students would quit within a week on "enrolling" in a Gurukula - Brahmin or otherwise.

    VARNA SYSTEM - 

    sociological mandates of a religion pertaining to dealing with Indian society.are of two kinds: internalones, such as the varnasystem, marriage customs, gender relations, and soforth, that only impact the internal society within a particular religion; and externalones, such as the requirement to proselytize or to kill or ill-treat outsiders,that impact those who are outsiders to a given faith. It is a religion;sown cosmological framework

     Wheninvestigating ancient social structures the most important factor isperspective and context. Modern social class categories do not really apply toancient cultures.Dr Ambedkar greatly errored here .The HINDU varṇa system refersto the classical structure of society first described in the Rig Veda wheresociety described as a single socio-economic being (puruṣa) was divided intofour sections: brahmins — teachers, priests, scholars, advisors were the headof the social entity, the kshatriyas — warriors and administrators were thearms of the social entity, the vaishyas — farmers, were the loins and thesudras — legs, were the support, the stabilizers and the locomotion of society.This was a purely idealistic description of society and not a socio-politicalfunctional model. Power in ever society in invested in the economy and in thosewho control the means of production.

    The four Varnas are a general professional classification ofhuman society — the same four categories can be found in every complexsociety.These were only a THEORETICAL

    All politicians, governing agencies, law-enforcement, borderprotection, armed forces etc. are “Kshatriyas”.

    All those who work in the teaching, consulting and legalprofession are categorised as “Brahmins”

    Those who work in finance, investment, banking, entrepreneursand investors, owners of the means of production etc. are “Vaishyas”

    And all those who work in service professions and vocations are“shudras”.

    VARNA were merely conventional designations signifyingoccupational differences and, since men were free to change their occupations,these diffe-rences had no hereditary or genetical basis.The distinctionsbetween Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Sudras are founded merely on theobservance of diverse rites and the practice of different professions. One whoengages in trade comes to be known as a merchant, one who indulges in militarypursuits is known as a soldier, and one who administers the country a king. Itwas not by birth that one becomes merchant, soldier orking but by the actionsthat one performs or the job one does.

     


    Every Society in the Ancient World was divided into distinct 4 classes -

    Priestly Class - BRahmins

    Warrior Class/Nobility - Kshatriya

    MErchant Class/Traders/Business/Farmers - Vaishya

    Working Class/Labourers/Common Public/all others - Shudra

    etc

    VARNA - was there to maintain check n balance of Powers - Division between Knowl;edge , Political power ,Wealth.Secularism" is a primitive separation which Europe was forced to develop to deal with monopolistic religion. While a step forward for Europe, it is not enough for a well-functioning society. In the current Western system, big pharma mints trillions while keeping people sick.Wealth can buy into political power (like Trump) or buy media (like Bezos). Big Pharma now buys "research journals" outright. Knowledge serves wealth, and wealth buys power. Knowledge itself is used as hand-maiden for political power and influence. Trust decreases.What if a people advanced into a deep understanding of human societies. Not only Church & State, but knowledge and State, knowledge and political power had to be kept separate. Knowledge then was not a tool of imperialism to subjugate peoples nor subservient to politics.In this "deep secularism", wealth too had to be separated. If knowledge and wealth mixed the former would be subverted for the needs of the latter. If political power and wealth mixed then political power would become a means to increase wealth rather than serve people.These were 3 main power centers which needed separation; and these power centers are there in all human societies. Some people have knowledge, others have political and military power, others have wealth, those that have neither of these serve the other three. In all societies How does one regulate these roles so that they serve the whole for a well-functioning system. That way those with knowledge pursue knowledge to benefit society, and not for wealth or power. Those with power cannot suppress knowledge or grab wealth.And those with wealth cannot simply buy out knowledge or political power? This "deep secularism", beyond a primitive "separation of Church & state" was the aim of the social science of role separation. Not just Church & state, knowledge, power & wealth needed to be separate.The collusion & mixing of these roles leads to major problems in society. This is why even today we consider education largely a non-profit sector, even in the West. Knowledge is separated from wealth. But the vast for-profit "coaching system" shows the collapse of this idea

    HEREDITARY n IMMOBILITY -

    Most of the Societies before 18th century Industrial Revolution were Hereditary based .

    through the influence of heredity and environment, the offspring of priests, warriors, businessmen, and laborers are usually bound to show many "family" traits. It may be easier for a son of a priest to become a priest, and for a son of a warrior to become a soldier. This was prevalent in Middles Ages among all society n civilizations.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 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.

    Reservation,Politics,Rapid Transportation n Communication methods Previously,The Castes were confined to a geographical area as the village society in india was self sufficient society,they didnot have the urge to explore and adventure which made Caste identity even more stronger ..All this changed with the Invasions,Colonization n esp after Industrial Revolution . Inter-caste hatred wasn't kindled by external forces. People weren't as driven by individualist fantasies, and so respected the jati vyavastha. Now that too is gone, thanks to foreign influence.

    Given enough time, faultlines can be manufactured between any two communities. Just to be clear, how many Hutu vs Tutsi clashes took place before 1994?

    BRAHMINISM -

    This entire Fiasco about Hinduism as Brahminism is coming from Protestant Christian Theology BRAHMINISM - Brahmins as the ‘spiritual leaders’ of Hindus. Christians obviously had no idea that Brahmins are not the same as Christian priests. They are purely meant to act as intermediaries for the performance of rituals – unlike the role of the Christian priest in congregations, the Hindu priest is not meant to act as the ultimate ‘spiritual leader’ in providing advice on the duties and means to attain moksha. That role is reserved for gurus,Sadhus,Sanyasis,Tantrics, rishis and yogis – who can be from any caste whatsoever and very often are from the supposed ‘most backward castes’ n So called DALITS. Eg are Ramdev, Valmiki and countless other current and historical spiritual leaders.

    The tendency due to western colonisation is to analyse India through western lenses and it doesn’t work. One cannot compare the clergy of ancient India to the clergy of Europe who themselves had absolute power through very rigid organisational structures and even over the King himself who was subject to the Pope. Power in ancient India was a binary of temporal power - (kṣatra) which was invested in the absolute monarch and spiritual power (brahma) which was invested in the Brahmins. In the Catholic system the power of the clergy derives from their essential role in the salvation of an individual - extra ecclesiam nulla salus - outside the Church there is no salvation. In Hinduism the Brahmins play no role whatsoever in the spiritual progress or liberation of the individual they are irrelevant. The only power-role they had in Vedic times was to bolster the power and legitimacy of the Kings through their yajñas.

    Priests also is a misleading term which is associated with Preaching, we hv Pundit,Purohita,Pujari,Archaka All these terms r distinct and r used in different contexts

    Past 200 hundred years there was no value to land. The only wealth that everyone wants to have are Cows. A person’s wealth is estimated by the no. of cows held. The more no. of cows you have the greater you are. There even used to be a threshold of 1000 cows to hold, which makes one a mini king or a chief in that particular area. Going back to the kings time, when one talks about a kingdom, they talk about the wealth factor too where the amount of Gold and Cattle used to be first in the list. After Britisher's arrival (who tore India apart by creating caste system) the value to land started growing eventually and it's skyrocketing now and as of now, we know more the land you hold the richer you are.

    Before industrialization in Indian conditions all so called castes rather occupational groups have almost exclusive occupations that generate income without competition or minimal conflict. Post industrialization with traditional occupations gone all forced to scramble for jobs in industry or jobs provided by government in government institutions which needs education. Being the community which depended on education and being already educated got chances naturally. It's heard that even illiterates got jobs in telephone industry as there are jobs in plenty laying poles, cables etc and moderately educated in offices। To be true there many not joined or reluctantly joined as salaries were very low. Being literate Brahmins naturally got jobs, we specially in teaching side. To be true even those jobs with meger salary attracted Brahmins as they are dependent on professions of teaching during ancient times and the jobs and income is nothing for farmers then. Later on that farmers children, that too poor farmers children started attracted to it as agriculture is not a rewarding occupation. Rich farmers never sold his land to others to live so all others have to within their occupation or do other works, not agriculture the aspect of which all forget. It's true of all occupations where others can't enter occupation of others as all are not allowed even to learn as it's passed from generation to generation among them and thus not possible to shift from their occupation in those days but blame Brahmins who the same way preserve their occupation on which they have to live invariably considering those days conditions. Without population control no caste people get 100,% employment these days. What we suffered being poor, below middle class and middle class is enough and not get children whom settle satisfactorily. Even settling 1or 2 is so difficult these days to be true. All parents should aware of this. Blaming, attacking others doesn't make our children to have live great or good life, the only life, instantly and which all should be vary while begetting children.

    Often, Brahmins were priests and teachers, rarely controlling wealth and political power. Vaishyas generated wealth but did not teach beyond their trade. Kshatriyas did not engage in business or teach, but administered and ruled.

    Farmers, according Megasthenes, “were not interfered with during wartime [by the military].” Usually, war affects the marginalized and those low down the social order the most, but we do not see it here.

    It was also noted that at the time Indica was written, Indian society did not have a culture of employing indentured or slave labor. That is despite having a societal structure which had seven “castes.”

    Those who had no possessions, studied and renounced the world - sanyasis/ascetics - were held in the highest regard. Irrespective of jaati, individuals could move from Brahmacharya (early education) > Grihastha (family) Vanaprastha (retirement/advisory) > Sanyasa (renunciation)

    The hierarchical power arrangement in ancient India is not what is popularly parroted. According to the Buddhist and Jain texts, the Nobles or Kṣatriyas were the highest caste.

    According to the Brahminical works (authored by Brahmins) the Priests or Brahmins are the highest in the hierarchy.

    According to realpolitik, and what we know of other cultures, the Nobility were always in every culture higher than the clergy for the simple reason that real power was in their hands and the Priests derived any power they had solely from the consensus of their personal patrons (yajamānas).

    In other words the King held absolute power over the entire kingdom and had exclusive use of coercion and force. The priests were disunited and disparate with individual fiefdoms (yajamāni-system) comprised of their client families - they had no power of coercion whatsoever.

    The Vedic position is that there are two sources of power (brahma-kṣatram); worldly power is in the hands of the Nobles, and spiritual power in in the hands of the Priests. Priests were often retained as ministers and advisers by the Royalty but the kings were under no obligation or had any imperative to follow their advice.

    The Priests would perform yajñas and ceremonies for the benefit, prosperity and power of the Kings and the Kings would in turn patronise the Brahmins and bestow land and cattle upon them - so it was a symbiotic relationship with the Kings dominating.

    With colonisation from the West and the waning of Royal Patronage, the political influence of the Brahmins declined until they became almost irrelevant. They managed to reassert their influence by aligning themselves with the British Colonial government and adopting western education with great enthusiasm. They were drafted into influential positions in the Colonial Apparatus as clerks, accountants, managers, teachers, lawyers, judges, advisors etc.

    And the interesting historical fact is the majority of ancient Indian royal dynasties were actual of the Sudra caste - so they had in many cases become the Nobility and thus held real power over Brahmins.

    Everything about India is complex, multi-layered and confusing - simple formulae and paradigms do not apply. Everything you say about India is both right and wrong depending on time-place-circumstance.

    The position as laid out by orthodox acharyas such as even the Puri Shankaracharya is that varna vyavastha is foremost a ritual system, not temporal, so Brahmins aren't necessarily meant to be political or economic elites (although people might cross the wires) and are frequently at the mercy of patrons. The tone and demands of some Smritis to me actually betray a sense of insecurity about that fact…

    Irony is they make fun of the so called caste system when they have the concept of god's chosen people

    the majority of ancient Indian royal dynasties were actual of the Sudra caste”

    Maurya dynasty

    Chandragupta Maurya — the Brahmin Chanakya actually selected him to become king by destroying the Nanda dynasty which was Kshatriya!!!

    Bimbisara (son of Chandragupta Maurya)

    Ashoka (son of Bimbisara)

    Chalukya dynasty of Badami — ruled Deccan and south India for 700 years (6th-12th centuries)

    The kings of this dynasty such as Pulakeshi II were great patrons of Vedic religion and the mainstream Hindu culture, art, literature and architecture

    Rashtrakuta dynasty — ruled Deccan and south India for nearly 300 years between 8th and 11th centuries

    Once again the great kings of this dynasty promoted and nurtured classical Hinduism and was also responsible for the exquisitely beautiful cave temples in Ellora (e.g. Kailasanatha Temple)

    Chola dynasty — ruled the Tamil country for nearly 350 years (10th-13th centuries)

    Rajaraja and his son Rajendra were great patrons of Hinduism and Vedic religion, and their trade relations with southeast Asia also carried Hinduism and Buddhism to that region.

    Vijayanagara empire —

    Famously the Brahmin Svami Vidyaranya chose the Shudras Harihara and Bukkaraya to lead an organized revival of a Hindu empire to thwart the incursion of Islam in south India.

    The second generation king Kumara Kampana rescued the Tamil region from Muslim rule

    Krishnadevaraya continued to strengthen the empire and it became a bastion of classical Hinduism all across India, and attracted scholars, musicians, artists from all over India. Temple architecture developed a new style with the tall imposing “Raya Gopurams” named for the Vijayanagara Kings (“Rayas”).

    Chandela dynasty — ruled central India between 9th and 13th centuries

    These kings were of tribal origin, but established a strong Hindu kingdom and patronized the Vedic religion and all-rounded Hindu culture, arts, music, philosophy, etc

    They built the legendary Khajuraho temple complex

    They were a major resistance against early Muslim invasions of Ghaznavi and Ghori

    Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty — ruled over western India between 8th and 12th centuries

    Rajput kingdoms — famously valiant and fierce defenders of the western frontier of India and followers and patrons of Hinduism

    Maratha empire — Shivaji was a Shudra and he was educated by Samarth Ramdas. Shivaji is famous for a second revival of Hinduism after the fall of Vijayanagara and for bringing the downfall of the Mughal empire and resisting the British takeover of vast parts of India for nearly a century.

    the standard reiterated IDEAL perpetuated by the Brahmins. The question is what is the REALPOLITIK.

    BTW ”Bhramin” is one who is deluded, from the root BHRM. The actual caste is called Brāhmaṇa.

    These was also a caste-mobility - after the Gupta period the vaishyas went into banking and trading and the Sudras became the land-owners and primary producers as well as the artisans and craftsmen.

    Caste Hierarchy-

    REAL power was in the hands of the Kings in EVERY kingdom on the face of the earth.

    Sounds like the standard books found in libraries. There is no such pyramid. This is all made up. The academics and priests in this diagram identified as brahmins are supposed to the poorest, while in reality people who call themselves as brahmins are wealthy doing anything but priests job.

    The influence and relevance of the Shankaracharyas is confined to the Smārta Brahmin community and of course those who choose to accept their authority.

    Theoretically at least all Hindu monks of the Dasa-nāmi orders (other than the Shaivites and Vaishnavas) are associated with one or other of the four Pontifical seats, but they are under no obligation or control of the Pontiffs of those seats and mostly act independently of them.

    The terms like equality,Hierarchy,Discrimination,Education n Privilege , Endogamy , Hereditary , Brahminism,Feminism , Sexism , Misogyny , Patriarchy,Hindu Right ,Natsi ,Fascist . Supremacist ,Funamentalist , Extremist , Islamophobia , Hindutva

    All these r bogus terms

    MANUVAAD -

    BeforeBritish ,Hindu law was never been formalised or applied uniformly anywhere inIndia or other Hindu kingdoms and empires in South East Asia for over 2000years. the nature of the judiciary and legal system in India has been extremelycomplex over the millennia reflecting the multifarious diversity of Indiansociety, and an egregious attempt to rationalise and regulate it caused immensedisruption which echos even today. The Laws of Manu are incredibly complex,contradictory, out-dated and simply impossible to apply in any practical way orreal-time situation - ever! So they never formed the basis of any legalframework in any Hindu kingdoms in India or South-east Asia EVER. it was thedescription of what those many authors saw as the IDEAL society - it never wasthe basis of any real practical law in any Indian state. The Britishresurrected Manusmriti

     

    The Laws of Manu are incredibly complex, contradictory,out-dated and simply impossible to apply in any practical way or real-timesituation - ever! So they never formed the basis of any legal framework in anyHindu kingdoms in India or South-east Asia EVER. it was the description of whatthose many authors saw as the IDEAL society - it never was the basis of anyreal practical law in any Indian state.

     Kings reigned supreme,They made and upheld the laws andadministrated the kingdom. The Brahmins were employed by the kings as to act asministers and judges and arbitrators - they had no power to implement anysocial engineering - although they may have acted as advisors. The ones whowere responsible for maintaining social order were the kings (kshatriyas)alone. What is totally overlooked by all the marxist social critics is that thecastes were by and large independent autonomous self-governing bodies. They managedtheir own daily affairs, had their own peculiar laws and customs andadministered their own justice.  There was no concept of NAtionstates back than ,People were free to move n settle anywhere

    In Hindu culture theage of marriage is decided by the specific caste and community according tocustom and tradition and is determined by puberty, not because it is written insome book. Most Hindu customs are not based on “Books” which nobody readsanyway let alone takes them for mandated practice manuals.

    Marginalized , Opression ; Systemic Caste Oppression and SocialJustice/Injustice -:

     

    What is Oppression n what is Justice/Injustice,

    Who determines that,Who establishes thestandards n parameters

    Who gives certificates

    These r fancy words, these words cannever be properly defined

    Just becoz a person is taking breath, another person can accuse thatperson of oppressing 

    EQUALITY -

    To achieve Equality -u hv to select some parameter-Height,Weight,Physical Strength,Knowledge,Wealth.

    Can all people have same Wealth at same point of time

    I am assuming you mean it in the post-modern Neo-Marxist sense of all humans being “equal” and are entitled to equity (equality of outcome).What u want is against NATURE.U want an Utopian Social class of Darwinian order where all People r equal?

    People’s efforts and competence vary. This will naturally lead to an unequal society. Inequality is natural, found everywhere in nature. Thus, equality is an unnatural dogma. Where does it come from?From Judeo-Christian Values. Everyone can't be equal. Your skill ur strategy your struggle defines your future if everyone became same then why would anyone give time to job study work ? If you're getting everything for free.

    Stratification of society and inequality is a universal phenomena and is found among all primates - monkeys, chimpanzees, gorillas - and even lobsters. And thus among ALL societies since Mesopotamia. The the forerunners were all playing the same game of cricket.

    hierarchy is the basis of every civilised society. Every society in the ancient world was divided in Nobles, Priests, Farmers and Workers

    Lack of discrimination on class? But discrimination is the very essence of class. Without that there would be no class. You want a "classless society"? Has this ever happened in any country in any time? And why?Why would one treat everyone equally? Those who have not studied should be treated equally to be rocket scientists or doctors? Rich and poor get treated equally in a 5-star?

    Equality before law? But the law itself is unequal. And access to it is unequal. Who can afford to go to court? How many can access the Supreme Court? Inequality is part of the "system of justice." And if inequality is part of the justice, what is justice?

    Let's posit an alternative. Instead of "equality" let us say our goal is to maximize human potential, or to maximize talent of a society. So one could do a broad talent search to locate this talent, and focus on nurturing it, wherever it exists.

    Here are two satirical pieces

    The Land of Equality, Part I
    In my quest far and wide for a society that had achieved equality I reached the Republic of Ladnam. At the border, there was a big arched gate made of stone. On it were pasted large irregular plastic letters, some of which had fallen off, reading “M_rit is _ _yth.” Lounging around the gate were...
    https://t.co/XyQNdWok55?amp=1


    Land of Equality, Part II
    Read Part I The Department of Social Division. I was now even more curious about this remarkable country of Ladnam. How did they come up with this system of victim ratings for all admissions and jobs? I figured the university would be the right place to find out – I asked a student for...
    https://t.co/ZECLiUpJVP?amp=1


    In what biological sense are men and women equal? Do both sexes have the same reproductive abilities, life-cycles, reactive dynamics, health issues etc?

    Are all humans born with the same physical characteristics, talents, skills, intelligence, abilities, health, strength, character, self-management skills, aspirations etc.? Are all humans born in the same socio-economic environment with the same equal opportunities this affords?Do all humans have the same psychological profile, aspirations and desires? So in what way are “all equal”?

    Hinduism observes reality as it is and is pragmatic as opposed to idealistic in its approach. Hinduism teaches that on an ontological level of the jīvātman, all sentient beings are “equal” in that we are all minute aspects of the totality of Being, the Unified Field. Popularly stated as “God dwells within each and every sentient being.” Hindus greet by saying NAMASTE which means “the divine in me salutes the divine in you!” So from a spiritual perspective we are all equal. Hinduism teaches that people are born different, with different talents,skills and aspirations.

    Every individual is unique and has their own trajectory in life according to their Karma. Notwithstanding our biological and social differences, from a social perspective, everyone should be given the same access to education, health-care and public transport - the three basic essentials for a modern society.

    Everyone should be assessed and treated on the basis of their merits and not their caste, religion, socio-economic background, ethnicity or gender. Is it possible to have equality of outcome? Clearly not - equity cannot be demonstrated nor is it logically feasible

    Social equality is a farce propagated by the followers of those religions which teach a true and permanent inequality between followers (superior) and non-followers (inferior — “heathen”, “infidel”, etc). These religions teach a permanent spiritual inequality for eternity, while hypocritically preaching “universal brotherhood”

    Hinduism, in its infinite wisdom, teaches spiritual equality of everyone, regardless of whether they are followers or non-followers. And in the mundane world, it says that inequality in inevitable due to the material origin of mentions nature. No two trees grow to the same heights, no two human beings are identical in their talents and abilities. Societies change with time, and social groups or individuals rise and fall in their importance or status. So striving for a utopian social equality is a futile attempt mentions In any case, Hinduism teaches that the ultimate goal of human life is to transcend society and the material world into a spirituality. Almost all Hindu saints and sages are people who were socially underprivileged, but spiritually rich.

    Social equality is a fanciful, unattainable pretense of the modern democratic world, which in fact perpetrates many many types of social inequality.LEFT is doctrinated with useless western social theories. It's a figment of imagination to achieve some utopian social justice.Utopia can never be achieved. Mao tried to usher in one and ended up killing millions. I'd rather be in a realistic world where If I make x widgets an hour, I should be paid more than someone who makes x/2 widgets an hour irrespective of what our group identities are.

    “Egalitarianism” is a 20th century-spun. Abrahamisms had the worst form of human slavery till the 20th century.

    For example, someone who spends years studying and doing research for a PhD doesn’t get paid even 1% of the money that a movie star with minimal education gets mentions paid for a single movie. So even in this harmless situation, there are two types of inequalities. And this, in a society which allows freedom of choice.

    For another example, the top 0.1% richest people in the USA earn 188 times as much as the bottom 90%.


    Inequality.org
    Your online portal to data, analysis, and commentary on income and wealth inequality.
    https://t.co/FeOHdY4oy4?amp=1



    DISCRIMINATION - 

    is the byproduct of Intelligence

    u GO TO A restaurant and order a particular dish ,that is also dicrimination with other dishes,

    U go to a Mall ,u order a particular brand of clothes,that is also discrimination with other Brands

    Similar , a person or a community will seek his own interests n discriminate , There are both +ve n -ve form of discriminations. A person has every right not to invite a garbage collector to his home at party,that is his free will, There is no discrimination there

    a person will go to a particular general store for buying daily use items who talks to him more nicely as compared to others, Similarly a person will choose a particular Doodhwala whose milk quality is more good,

    Each of those communities(JAATIS) as a unit wielded sufficient power proportionate to their expertise, that they were self-governing units without any external control.

    Suppose There are 5 communities living A,B,C,D,E. . Now A will not allow D to enter its area n drink from its water source ,It is A's comfort n convenience n Choice not any Discrimination.

    This is a complex issue - but all discrimination universally in every society relates to 2 factors:–

    1. Food and communal dining - we eat with family, friends, colleagues, social equals - and the sharing of food and drink is an important part of social bonding and so we are all discriminate in this social interaction in every society.
    2. Marriage – we prefer to marry with our own social, linguistic and cultural groups and those families with whom we share common, values, customs and traditions.

    Then there are many other forms of discrimination based on gender, race, class, caste in which there is exploitation, marginalisation, oppression and suppression - also found to some degree in every society.

    Most Hindus are completely deficient in the knowledge of the Dharma Shastras and don’t realise that most of their social prejudices and discriminations are completely arbitrary and off track and frankly hypocritical.

    Being able to discriminate is a privilege people have in any free and civilized society. Discrimination does not necessarily mean exploitation. People discriminate every day, e.g. hiring a better lawyer, befriending nicer people, etc. Ability to discriminate makes one an adult.

    Discrimination on the basis of someone's socio-economic background is not random. A person's background has a profound effect on their sense of being. Would you allow a man raised in the tribal areas of Afghanistan to babysit your 9 year old daughter?

    ·

    The point is, discrimination is natural and useful. It will never go away. Rich will discriminate against poor. Attractive women will discriminate against ugly men. Religions will discriminate against non-believers. Democratic governments will discriminate against minorities.

    Discrimination and exploitation are two different things. No law can snatch an individual's right to choice - which may or may not be discriminatory. Law CAN and should prevent exploitation of any sort.

    Modernity's greatest weapon is its false promise of equality of outcomes. Equality doesn't exist in nature. No two organisms are equal, not even twins. Hence, outcome of their efforts are unequal as well, leading to a hierarchy.

    Those who promise equality of outcome are snake oil salesmen. They cannot deliver on their promise. When the goal (equal outcome from unequal individuals) is not achieved, they declare the better individual to be a cheater. Thereby maintaining their appeal to the masses.

    They end up creating an 'oppressor-victim' hierarchy based on long term outcomes. Hierarchies are natural in any system. Unequal outcomes lead to 'value-based' hierarchies in healthy societies and 'oppresor-victim' hierarchies in unhealthy ones.

    To forcibly produce equal outcomes, these social engineers (snake oil salesmen) create a system that's stacked against the 'oppressor' and in favour of the 'victim' (Bioleninism). This is how we got the draconian SC/ST act and upto 90 percent reservations in some States.

    Their basic assumption is that everyone is equal, e.g. men who built New York (NY) & the tribals of Papua New Guinea are equal. If you bring the tribal to NY & make him live there for 40 yrs., his son would be the same as other New Yorkers in terms of ability to produce value.

    But is this true? Can you bring someone from a less-developed culture to a more-developed culture without any adverse effects to the latter? Civilizations are physical manifestations of collective wisdom of populations. If people change, so does the civilization.

    SYSTEMIC CASTE OPPRESSION -

    There must be a system in place for this. Institutional Oppression occurs when established laws, customs, and practices systemically reflect and produce inequities based on one's membership in targeted social identity groups. If oppressive consequences accrue to institutional laws, customs, or practices, the institution is oppressive whether or not the individuals maintaining those practices have oppressive intentions

    Varna was only a theoretical description based on what the person is currently engaged with.There never was any central organisation giving certificates of varna status to people.there never was an administrative structure in place to ensure the varna status of any person, The problem with forced Varna label is- is that there has to be a central organisation and an administrative structure n bureaucracy in place to ensure the compliance of the people fixed with varna and with the imposed varna behaviour n duties .The pre-colonial written record in royal court documents and traveller accounts studied by professional historians and philologists like Nicholas Dirks, GS Ghurye, Richard Eaton, David Shulman and Cynthia Talbot show little or no mention of caste.

    Social identities were constantly malleable. "Slaves" and "menials" and "merchants" became kings; farmers became soldiers, and soldiers became farmers; one's social identity could be changed as easily as moving from one village to another; there is little evidence of systematic and widespread caste oppression or mass conversion to Islam as a result of it. All the available evidence calls for a fundamental re-imagination of social identity in pre-colonial India.

    On the social spectrum - on one extreme we have Brahmins with a preoccupation with purity and practice who are completely inward looking and on the other end - Sudras who are free from all religious restrictions and obligations and to eat n travel as they like.

    Majority Sudras were Wealthy Landowners ,some had dynasty of Kings ,They managed huge chunks of economy of production, they were soldiers in army n fought in WARS.

    BRahmins r further sub divided in Vedic BRahmins , Ahitagnis n Mahapatras.n so on

    Why there r so many JAATIS - Diversity ,Evolution of Society n Economic Expansion

    Annhiliation of Castes = Annhiliation of Nations

    Individual Rights , Community Rights , Right to choose, personal choice n preferences ,free will

    My choice , Hijab is my choice but this is not .Double standards.

    Religion - Set of Beliefs n practices

    Caste - Social Occupation n status

    Gender-Sexual Orientation of person

    Forward Caste , Backward Caste ,Sc/St - British Constructs

    Substitute Humanity in place of Hinduism and Nations,Races,Tribes,Clans in place of Caste and apply Right to Choose,my choice

    MArxist approach believes in taking away Freedoms .Every Hindu has its own freedom to choose n select acc to his/her convenience n choices. Like a country protects its borders from illegal emigrants n foreigners like Humanity protects from Aliens.

    Solution - we can only empower n educate people, gave them all modern amenities- home,gas,electricity,water supply etc. Basic education, We need patience n some time

    Instead of reserving Seats -

    Age relaxation - For Oppressed people,it should be 45 instead of 30

    No of attempts - Unlimited till maximum age for such people

    Instead of having exams once in a year,for them exam should be held 2-3 times in a single year

    Form fees exempt,travel allowance given

    Monthly allowance for food,living expense,n other basic necessities.

    But they should come only through MERIT

    There should be a detailed Socio-Economic survey - Identify the marginalized n oppressed people,give them Basic Houses, Electrocity,water facility ,gas etc..and some acres of land .For that a list has to be prepared - Citizen Register ,This process will take time -50 years

    There should be a Universal Free primary n secondary Education in India for every child

    Patel stated:

    the Scheduled Caste has to be effaced altogether from our society, and if it is to be effaced, those who have ceased to be untouchables and sit amongst us must cease to forget they are untouchables […] We are now to begin again. So let us forget these sections and cross-sections and let us stand as one, and together.

    Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya n Shudra,Candala,Nisadha, r descriptions of individuals based on the occupation n work they r doing , that can be changed over time n is not static .

    Consciousness i.e. ATMAN is same in all these individuals n this atman attains Moksha which is devoid of any varna,gender,caste,race n creed etc.

    Name Calling - Smear the opponent first and rest of the time will be spent by him to prove he is not that and than u win . Cancel culture n name calling - Abrahamnic mentality where their lit. is full of shaming . torturing n lynching its detractors.

    Equality of Opportunity: An Introduction – I

    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.

    HIERARCHY -

    https://twitter.com/Subhash194/status/1406729294185783299?s=20 

    There is hierarchy (pecking order) in every living species on the planet. Dominance hierarchy is imprinted in our biological and genetic DNA.Individuals are constantly competing for dominance in every sphere of existence — as with individuals so with groups.humans are social being. We eventually seek to form groups and like minded people get together.

    Hindu scriptures reflect reality. So an hierarchy of power and value is mentioned but there are many variations on what exactly the hierarchy is.Hierarchy is a natural phenomenon. If you watch David Attenborough’s nature series you would know that social hierarchy is natural to every almost species and especially primates. The difference is that chimpanzees - our nearest cousins have a male dominated hierarchy (patriarchy) and bonobos have a matriarchy. Even lobsters have a hierarchy as Dr. Jordan Peterson has illustrated. Hinduism teaches

    There is a natural hierarchy in every society. People have different “social value” - a pediatric heart surgeon has great social value than a car- salesman or a lawyer. A nurse has greater social value than a priest. All living beings have “intrinsic value” because they are all manifestations of God. We should treat all beings with respect, kindness, consideration, equality, compassion and generosity. In other words we should practice the Golden Rule - treat others as you would like them to treat you.

    Supremacism n Elitism in Caste like Japanese feudalism n Chinese imperial bureaucracy hv origins in sociology n economics. Skilling limitations, less opportunities due 2 hereditary transference of knowledge coupled vd stagnant urbanisation results in system like caste.It dies vd economic prosperity and education.

    Every complex sophisticated society on earth has a hierarchy based either on power or competence or both.

    Every power hierarchy however benign and benevolent at inception tends towards exploitation, oppression and tyranny.

    Every human being will seek his/her advantage at the expense of others unless restrained by some moral force. All primates naturally care for their own circle or tribe and will exploit and plunder others mercilessly.

    Fear of the other, stereotyping, racism, tribalism, discrimination and all forms of separative judgment and rationality are inherent human qualities which need to be overridden by moral and ethical teachings and practice.

    Our ego and the subconscious craving for recognition led to the scientific and technological discoveries and inventions, the masterpieces in different forms of art, and, ultimately, to the creation of modern civilization. Our aggressive and combative behavior, the desire to compete and dominate, to occupy the highest position in the hierarchy, to be a part of the elite are the essential innate features of human nature.

    Obviously all this changed with the market forces. Nowadays few people work in their hereditary professions. The problems associated with the caste/class system are the universal ones — prejudice, discrimination, oppression, exploitation, corruption, coercion, etc. These faults are found in all Human Societies wherever they are. Even the Soviets and Chinese couldn’t eradicate the class system in their Communist Utopias.

    These kind of discriminations existed in every Society n Civilization n Culture at that times.Anybody can look this from China,Japan,Korea,Africa,America To European Societies. All these societies reformed by themselves becoz there was no Foreign entity reforming them. The main Problem is Hindus were never given the chance to correct things. by their own,Instead People who destroyed India made rules n labels for Indians ,

    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.

    Existence of historical SC communities - ability to have family, community, organization - indicate general lack of slavery, serfdom ,oppression in India as compared to rest of World.Most of the current Shudra communities in fact managed huge chunks of economy in service/manufacturing/cottage industry/arts etc, many cases with monopoly. So right to body as a concept would be existing in ancient india. ,In a functioning society these would be so normal that few would make a issue why one is not given a hug Early secular Travel visitors at times didn’t note these as matters worth noticing.In the Indian sub-continent there are thousands of of different communities with dozens of variations and complexity in power and hierarchical structures - the technical term that is being increasingly applied to these complex societies is heterarchy.

    Heterarchies are socio-political systems in which multiple dynamic power structures govern the workings of the system.

    So some communities in India the common village spaces and land were managed by different communities ..Countries with population a fraction of the Indian subcontinent/Hindu civilisation are simply not able to grasp that a large population will organise itself into smaller units.

    They are just bewildered and make up bizzzare theories

    PURITY ,IMPURITY -

    Hygienic principles r universal- regarding food and water and eating and drinking like bathing and washing hands before food preparation, covering of the mouth, clipping nails and shaving heads and beards etc. Hygiene is based on germ theory of disease -Many Diseases r spread by touch,by water n by droplets-so use of detergents and disinfectants; non-touch technique like not eating off the same plates and dishes,disposable banana leaf vessels,eating by hand, not eating the food cooked by strangers, not allowing people into the kitchen,not allowing certain people to draw water from the same well who r engaged in unclean professions etc.

    What to eat,what not to eat n from whom it can be received is about personal choice n free will. Certain raw or dry foodstuffs can be accepted from anybody n some not.There is no discrimination here ,It is plain n simple. If u want to eat whatever u want ,go to any restaurants or Motel ,Here nobody seems to care who the cook or the waiters are or where the foodstuffs come from .

    If i am paying from my purse ,than it is my right to choose what food i want and from whom, None of ur Business

    UNTOUCHABILITY -

    https://hindumediawiki.com/story.php?id=897


    EDUCATION & PRIVELEGE -

    Modern Education itself has originated in 19 century, So it is basically 120-130 years old,Printing press was invented in 16 century and there was no Education whatsoever anywhere in World ,no systematic science or Maths. So all this oppression,suppression,depression narrative is nothing but beautiful fables n imaginary stories used by those who are free loaders .

    They twist it to mean learning of Vedas was denied to them.

    Response - The "education" we are talking about, was introduced in India by British only 200 years ago. Brahmins were custodian of Vedic texts, which Bhimrao rejected as irrational. How your ancestors not studying irrational texts, affect your ability in scientific education??

    Using todays’s model in which historically more people attend university than 100 years ago - still what is the percentage of people attending university? Teachers and lecturers only have power over their students - not society at large - Would a riksha-walla or chai-walla today will be concerned about the views of Jordan Peterson? Similarly ,commoners would not be interested in views n opinions of Brahmins. The Renaissance in Europe did not come from the "masses" of equal,classless people. The Medicis weren't Buddhists, neither were the Spanish royalty who commissioned explorations, and neither were the scientists we celebrate from India from Aryabhata to Varahamihira to Brahmagupta. to Panini(heck, they were all Brahmins!)The many inventions in India, Egypt, China and so on likewise never came from the masses. Education was the happy hunting ground of a few by virtue of privilege and money (in the form of caste or royalty or aristocracy or simply money). What we consider education today was a luxury pretty much upto the early 20th century. Illiteracy was the rule rather than the exception. Those were the days of subsistence, when activities were carried out eking a livelihood ranging from agriculture to commerce.

    Privilege of Modern Era cant be compared to privilege of primitive age - who is more privileged,a man 600 years ago ,who has 6 servant to give him air with a big cloth fan or a guy who has A.C. today ? Life was hard in Old World.People spent their daily

    activities in collecting water,arranging n preparing for food and other basic necessities. There were no rapid communication n transportation methods,communities were close-knit n exclusionary.

    One cannot imagine a life without smartphones today.. and people comment about times back then... when water lose by itself was a luxury... using pompous phrases like " basic human rights" n Oppression,suppression

    Nowadays education is open to all - caste/Jaati is irrelevant to education and modern careers. People can choose whatever career they want and progress in that profession according to their merit.

    Suppose your father was a blacksmith, so at the age of 6, the moment you were ready, you started playing around with the hammer and anvil. By the time you were 8, your father saw that you anyway wanted to hit it, so it was better to hit it with some purpose. By the time you were 12, you were on the ,the time you were 18 or 20, you had some craft and expertise on your hand to make your own living. So if your father was a blacksmith, you became a blacksmith; if your father was a goldsmith, you became a goldsmith. Each profession developed its own training centers within the family structure because that was the only training center; all the craft, professionalism and skills in the society could only evolve like this. If you are a blacksmith, you do not try to go and do a goldsmith's job, you just do a blacksmith's job because we need a blacksmith in the society. When people multiplied and became a thousand blacksmiths, naturally they had their own way of eating, their own way of marriage and their own way of doing things, so they formed a caste. There is really nothing wrong with it if you look at it on one level. It was just a certain arrangement of convenience for the society. Between a blacksmith and a goldsmith, the kind of hammer they use, how they work, how they look what and how they eat, everything was naturally distinctly different because the type of work was very different.

    https://twitter.com/Subhash194/status/1388827773536505857?s=20

    When I visited Tanzania on a safari tour I was given a tour to tribal homes still living ancient ways in jungles. I was surprised to know that no. of cows was a barometer of wealth. Any family must have 5–6 cows in order to be called respectably. And a chief must have at least 10 cows.

    Can these trollers tell if there is any animal more useful to mankind than cows? why would people need to read Vedas in pre industrial agricultural World

    why would anyone undertake a 12 year course in Vedic studies in Pre industrial agr world ,Today You can read them in any language - but you will probably not understand them and you will be bored shitless after 1st Mandala - guaranteed!

    ENDOGAMY -

    Edogamy was present everywhere . People belonging to particular planets,countries,states,regions,cities,professions,Ideologies will prefer to marry among their own Circles unless they are not in contact with outside world.

    through Rapid Transportation n Communication methods Previously,The Castes were confined to a geographical area as the village society in india was self sufficient society,they didnot have the urge to explore and adventure which made Caste identity even more stronger .

    To understand Evolution as a key role in shaping so called 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 which developed strong Tribalism. Of course, the jaundiced critic may call this attitude as frog-in-the-well but that was how things were in Pre-Industrial Agricultural World.

    These things developed Endogamy n Craft Exclusivity n Closing of Ranks. Every Jaati operated n worked as an autonomous unit with its own rules n regulations .There was no concept of Nation n states back than ,People were free to move,

    In ancient times,in a pre-industrial agricultural world,people preferred to marry with their own social, linguistic and cultural groups and those families with whom they shared common, values, customs and traditions.This thing can be observed among every Civilization,every living species

    Every society had ,has a class structure, some more formalised than others. Like it or not .These classes marry and socialise within their circles because of commonalities in culture and ease of movement within their circles. Social and economic progress are social issues not religious ones. As you well know the issue of kith & kin and caste runs very deep and is immensely complex.caste endogamy is about preservation of specific culture/language/cuisine/traditions, not aspiring towards a different caste. caste isn't a pyramid, it's linear. The terms "upper" and "lower" must be done away with, they are inaccurate

    Marriage is not the same as animal cross-breeding or plant grafting. Every society has its internal norms. Just to treat someone as equal, one need not resort to marriage just to prove it.

    Moreover ,people would have done it to ensure Stability,security n transmission of some social skills. human beings are naturally inclined to tribalism its in our DNA. So we look for any common ground to agglutinate together and to set ourselves against others. In ancient times,there were no modern means of transportation,communication.

    Life was hard.People spent their daily activities in collecting water,arranging n preparing for food and other basic necessities.There were no rapid communication methods ,communities were close-knit and exclusionary. one cannot imagine a life without smartphones today.. and Ambedkar commented about times back then... when water lose by itself was a luxury... using pompous phrases like " basic human rights"...People were self-bound to custom and tradition and trapped within the web of family and community. If one was strong-willed one can do exactly as one pleased. Living one’s life according to the expectations and in order to please others (family and community) is a major source of suffering even today. The biggest issue facing young people in India is the problem of career and marriage and the objections of family members to the choice of partner. In every other respect people are already following their own wishes.

    Jati endogamy is not the same as "caste discrimination" or "caste hierarchy." Jatis are cultural groups. Jati endogamy is a

    form of cultural compatibility for marriage. This is not the

    same as discriminating against someone in the public sphere and does *not* connote hierarchy.

    Jati is a unit of multiculturalism. Jatis allowed enormous cultural diversity to thrive in India over 1000s of years. Each jati could observe their own way of life without the imposed uniformity of European nationalism or monotheism. It also allowed integration of outsiders.

    I understand why in-jati marriage preference is a form of seeking compatibility in marriage.

    The word "Discrimination" is problematic here , it's superimposing the Marxist "conflict" narrative over a reasonable social behavioural pattern which is the result of natural evolution by trial and error over centuries. The correct word should be caste discernment ++

    As far as discrimination is concerned, it's a negative behaviour pattern which can never be completely eliminated . Only one kind of discrimination can replace another kind of discrimination .It can be found in utopian Marxist societies where power hierarchy exists no matter what

    As far as endogamy or cartelization or business monopolies are concerned that comes within the ambit reasonable behaviour if practiced with reasonable restrictions .

    Endogamy is the practice of marrying within a specific social groupreligious denominationcaste, or ethnic group, rejecting those from others as unsuitable for marriage or other close personal relationships.

    Endogamy is common in many cultures and ethnic groups. Several religious and ethnic religious groups are traditionally more endogamous, although sometimes with the added dimension of requiring marital religious conversion. This permits an exogamous marriage, as the convert, by accepting the partner's religion, becomes accepted within the endogamous rules. Endogamy, as distinct from consanguinity, may result in transmission of genetic disorders, the so-called founder effect, within the relatively closed community.

    Endogamy can serve as a form of self-segregation; a community can use it to resist integrating and completely merging with surrounding populations. Minorities can use it to stay ethnically homogeneous over a long time as distinct communities within societies that have other practices and beliefs.

    The isolationist practices of endogamy may lead to a group's extinction, as genetic diseases may develop that can affect an increasing percentage of the population. However, this disease effect would tend to be small unless there is a high degree of close inbreeding, or if the endogamous population becomes very small in size.

    Hindu society as if it is a monolith that has existed unchanged since the beginning. There are innumerable examples from ancient times when birth-based caste did not exist, and people chose their vocation freely. Please read more about the history of birth-based caste. It started only in the early centuries AD, and only progressively became stricter. Even so, there are countless examples from medieval times where “caste” was never a barrier for occupations. For example, most kings of medieval kingdoms were Shudras. The founders of the great Vijayanagara empire were shepherds.The communities in traditional India each specialized in an occupation useful to society. Each of those communities as a unit wielded sufficient power proportionate to their expertise, that they were self-governing units.

    Caste system develops, when the worth difference within a society sharpens to such a point that the social superior shuns fellowship and intermarriage with the inferior, thus creating a society made up of closed hereditary classes. This happened in European history for centuries. For example, among the Saxons of the eighth century social divisions were cast-iron, and the law punished with death the man who should presume to marry a woman of rank higher than his own. The Lombards, claims Ross, killed the serf who ventured to marry a free woman, while the Visigoths and Burgundians scourged and burned them both. Among the early Germans a freedman remained under the taint of ancestral servitude until the third generation, i.e., until he could show four free-born ancestors.

    As class lines harden, the upper class becomes more jealous of its status and resists or retards the admission of commoners, however great their merit or wealth. This was the motivation of observed caste lines in the Roman Empire. Castes become a means to block social mobility. Over time, it does not matter if an individual has merit or talent or creative energy. The birth or purity of blood becomes more decisive for social status than the differences of occupation or wealth which raised up the original social inequalities. Look for more details on global perspectives and for “The last untouchable in Europe”.

    The caste system was just a way of organising society and establishing hierarchy - it is common to all biological systems and every society on earth - even the Communists have a caste/class system with advantages and disadvantages for the elect.Many classical societies of the world had pre-modern social systems worse than India. When transformed into modern states they dealt with unequal social systems by banning such official lists &registers. If you want equal society you should stop using unequal measures-

    What is deplorable is not the structure, its the oppression, exploitation, suppression, discrimination etc. that humans engage in when given the opportunity - again common to all societies. How was the medieval Christian society with its caste-system? How were the peasants treated? The system itself is not bad as long as there are possibilities of human flourishing and access to health and education and social services. The ultimate form of spiritual discrimination is posited by Christianity and Islam - eternal sadistic torture for all unbelievers - for ETERNITY and the exaltation and bliss for the believers. In Hinduism there is a human hierarchy based on many conditioning factors but the Self(atman) is the same in all beings and all Selves will ultimately be reunited in the Godhead.

    PRESENTISM -

    The greatest error of modern critics is “presentism”. In literary and historical analysis, presentism is the anachronistic introduction of present-day ideas,values and perspectives into depictions or interpretations of ancient works -they need to be analysed within their context and not through a modern lens . One needs to understand the texts in context and in comparison to similar texts.

    Context and perspective is important before making Judgements. We need to time-travel to make judgements, sitting in our comfortable middle class lounges, sipping chardonnay in AC with surround sound is not a base for harsh judgements of past systems.

    We need to understand the world of 3000 years ago. Agrarian, low tech (Bullock carts, ploughs, buckets, ropes etc.), simple living, no consumerism. And then learn some socio-economic history.

    Your position is society and the job you did on the farm was determined by your birth family. So the son of a farmer would be a farmer, a carpenter, a cobbler, a cowherd, a priest, a warrior - would all teach their own trades to their sons. So rigid caste develops.

    We cannot judge them based on the morals of today, that was just how the world was in those times and that is how all Ancient Civilizations n Societies behaved

    Then comes the Gupta age of economic expansion - as society grows more sophisticated and more complex and consumerism increases - jātis develop to cater to the needs for fine goods. etc. etc. etc.

    The tribes or clan were confined to a geographical area as the village society in india was self sufficient society they didnot have the urge to explore and andventure which made the jati's even more stronger.Labor was changing and so was the division of labor. The broader categories changed little. The warriors classes continue to be engaged in army. The priest classes also expanded into sectors related to education and math. The merchant classes expanded into different types of trade. The details changed, but the broader structure survived to this day.

    Post Industrial Age all these jātis and castes became redundant - the majority of their hereditary professions have disappeared just as the majority of the jobs we do today will disappear in 20 years.

    Since the first Industrial Revolution the ancient Vedic socio-economic model has become obsolete and what reformers are struggling against is the residue social odure of discrimination based on birth alone - the major form of which is related to inter-marriage in Indian society and which doesn't noticeably obtain in the 70 million expatriate Hindu community.

    So ,we get Varna-Jaati was a socio-economic model - religion was at one time pervasive - everything involved religion. It is a universal principle. Since the Industrial Revolution the world has changed and the varna-jāti economical model is now defunct. Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) is a philosophy of life concerned primarily with dukha (suffering) the causes and the solution. Economic paradigms do not answer or respond to the fundamental philosophical questions of life. Vedanta has nothing to do with economical paradigms and hence the VJ system can happily be jettisoned in the 21st century.

    The problems associated with every hierarchical structure are the same - all based on greed and self-interest — exploitation, oppression, prejudice, discrimination, dissimulation, cruelty etc. etc.

    People evolve, moral ideas - ie. Dharma changes -even the Shastra says if a teaching or custom is repulsive or objectionable to the people it should be abandoned. So Dharma is democratic and is constantly evolving. Many things we did 2000 years ago we find horrible now. 200 years ago the British exiled women to Australia for 7 years for stealing bread or potatoes to feed their starving children. If a hungry man stole chicken he was hanged. For 400 years the Europeans plied the transatlantic slave trade. Women were treated as possessions and only given the vote in 1900. Until 50 years ago homosexuals were imprisoned for 2 years - today they have marriage equality. So all societies evolve and get better with every passing year.

    So we see as society changes norms, values and hierarchies change. So it was in Europe as well - but the europeans were quick to respond to socio-economic changes becoz they were not under Foreign Occupation but Indians are slow - still operating on Victorian models of 100 years ago.

    If u consider Indian Society without Hindu concept of Varna for a moment,U will realize that this arrangement was common with all other societies n things were same.People never thought it wrong. It is just that Hinduism is more refined and it went further in its description.

    The greatest error of modern critics of Hindu Varna-Jaati is “presentism”. In literary and historical analysis, presentism is the anachronistic introduction of present-day ideas,values and perspectives into depictions or interpretations of ancient works - they need to be analysed within their context and not through a modern lens .This presentation is called “Presentism” becoz we apply modern humanistic values in judgement upon ancient defunct texts.Nowadays much of critical commentary stems from “Presentism” - projecting todays’ values onto ancient texts - which is a deeply flawed methodology. One needs to understand the texts in context and in comparison to similar texts.

    You cannot judge a society of 3000 years ago by our present modern values. Freedom is a post-modern concept. Every society is in transition and evolving. 200 years ago the British transported women who stole potatoes to feed their starving children, to Australia for 7 -8 years. people were hanged in England for stealing anything above 40 pounds in value. The British had a very rigorous class system. Gays have been outcasts in European society till 50 years ago. It was after the invasions and the colonization that the stratification got really bad. Heck, when Marco Polo visited India in the 13th century, he said that both men and women walked around more or less naked and it was not considered anything. He was pretty puritanical and pissy about it. Then came the Islamic invasions, mass rape and worse - then women had to cover head to toe and restrictions increased over time to the point many communities didn’t allow their womenfolk to go outside due to the danger then it became a “custom”.

    Most folks today see the ancient world retroactively through the lens of their current situation instead of doing a mental time-travel thing and putting themselves back in time.

    Life spans were short in them days (40 - 50 years was very old) — and the imperative for most people was to learn a trade and get to work, get married at puberty - have as many kids as possible because 1/3rd of them would die before their first birthday.

    In the old days people had to walk for kilometers to rivers to wash clothes and fetch water - sometimes twice a day. Then there was milking, churning, cooking, cleaning, child-rearing - 24/7 …

    The only way to get an education was to learn the trade of your father and your community.

    To study one Veda it took a full-time study of 12 years ending at age 21. Most commoners were parents of numerous children by then.

    BUT there was a major revolution in 1439 when a German guy invented a printing press - not long after, printed books began appearing in India and in a flash we arrive at the 21st century when all the Vedas and allied literature is now IN PRINT!

    This is also indicated by Maslow's hierarchy. You need to satisfy the bottom tiers before you move up (esteem) and before Industrial Revolution in 18 century,most people were busy satisfying their Basic needs. Context and perspective is important. All of human civilisation for the past 100,000 years has been by default imperfect struggling for perfection. We need to time-travel to make judgements, sitting in our comfortable middle class lounges, sipping chardonnay in AC with surround sound is not a base for harsh judgements of past systems.

    SECULARISM n COMMUNALISM -

    ACC .TO Secularism ,the state cannot grant priviliges to any individual(him/her) based on the religious belief of a Citizen becoz the state has nothing to do with Religion

    So There cannot be any religious majority or minority becoz that will violate the principle of Secularism

    Majority-Minority can be determined through many Criteria like HEIGHT,WEIGHT,INCOME

    EG -

    People above 7 ft height are in minority whereas all other are are in majority

    People above weight 100 kg are in minority whereas all other aer in majority

    People earning above 50 crore are in minority whereas all other are in majority .

    Religion is about personal beliefs n practices of a person ,this cannot be used as a basis for determining majority or minority.

    Every Religion comprises of several components - like Hinduism for eg -

    Theology

    Philosophy - Vedanta

    Sociology - Varna-Jaati system, (Dharmashastras ,Smritis ,Dharmasutras)

    History - Itihasas(Ramayana ,Mahabharata)

    Mythology - Puranas

    Ontology – the nature of being.

    Epistemology – the way we know things.

    Deontology – what is the ethical way to behave i.e. DHARMA

    Ritual -

    Metaphysics – investigates the fundamental nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, between substance and attribute, and between potentiality and actuality.

    A person can follow multiple religions at the same time,where is the problem? Problem lies with

    India is the only country with a Minority Commission and minority specific schemes WHICH IS outright fraud acc to Secularism

    REGARDING INTERSECTIONALITY N OPPRESSION

    The Brahmins of Up have no connection with Dalits of TN, The BRahmins of Western UP Region have no connection with Dalits of Eastern UP region , The BRahmins of Lucknow city in UP have no connection with Dalits of Kanpur City in UP.

    EQUAILITY in HINDUISM n HINDU TEXTS -

    In the vast library of Hinduism one can find texts supporting every spectrum of socio-political ideology. People tend to adopt those ideas which support their own prejudices, so there are hundreds of verses which support caste and gender based discrimination and there are just as many verses condemning any form of discrimination.

    There are two aspects to this question -

    1. are all creatures really “equal”
    2. How should WE treat other sentient beings?

    I would like to address the second question in detail:–

    How should we treat other beings?

    In the Gītā Kṛṣṇa says quite clearly: –

    vidyā vinaya saṁpanne brāhmaṇe gavi hastini | śuni caiva śvapāke ca paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ || 5:18 ||

    The sages regard with equality one well-endowed with learning and humility, a Brahmana, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater.

    Then in the Srimad Bhagavatam (11:29:13 — 18) in the final address to Uddhava he expands upon this concept of sama-darśana - this is one of my favourite passages because it is a summary of the entire philosophy of Vedānta so I give it here in full. Before you start whining about how hard it is, remember this is the highest goal that should be striven for - accomplishing it is unimportant it is the practice which matters - so begin this practice today! Here and now.

    māmeva sarvabhūteṣu bahir antarapāvṛtam | īkṣetātmani cātmānaṁ yathā kham amalāśayaḥ || 12 || iti sarvāṇi bhūtāni mad bhāvena mahādyute | sabhājayan manyamāno jñānaṁ kevalam āśritaḥ || 13 || brāhmaṇe pulkase stene brahmaṇye’rke sphuliṅgake | akrūre krūrake caiva samadṛk paṇḍito mataḥ || 14 || nareṣvabhīkṣṇaṁ madbhāvaṁ puṁso bhāvayato’cirāt | spardhāsūyātiraskārāḥ sāhaṅkārā viyanti hi || 15 || visṛjya smayamānān svān dṛśaṁ vrīḍāṁ ca daihikīm | praṇamed daṇḍavad bhūmāvāśva cāṇḍāla go kharam || 16 || yāvat sarveṣu bhūteṣu mad bhāvo nopajāyate | tāvad evam upāsīta vāṅ manaḥ kaya vṛttibhiḥ || 17 || sarvaṁ brahmātmakaṁ tasya vidyayātma manīṣayā | paripaśyann uparamet sarvato mukti saṁśayaḥ || 18 ||

    The pure minded devotee should cognise Me, the Lord of all, pervading every object within and without, including himself, like the all-pervading unobstructed Space (ākāśa). (12)

    O wise Uddhava, know him to be one of true illumination (paṇḍita) having insight generated by wisdom, who, possessing equal vision perceives and honours all beings as My manifestations — be they brahmins or outcastes, persecutors or virtuous men, the sun or a spark of fire, a tranquil person or a violent one. (13 - 14)

    In those who constantly cultivate the perception of Me in all beings, there will no longer be competitiveness with equals, jealousy towards superiors, contempt for inferiors, and excessive preoccupation with oneself. (15)

    Disregarding the ridicule of friends and relatives, casting aside the sense of high and low based on physical appearance, abandoning all shyness and shame based on such erroneous judgement, one should prostrate respectfully before all beings, dogs, outcastes, cattle, donkeys etc, seeing them all as manifestations of Me (16)

    Until the consciousness that all beings are My manifestations has been well established in the mind, one should commune with Me through external worship (mūrti-pūjā) and acknowledge My presence in all beings by thought, word and deed. (17)

    By virtue of this practice of equal vision of the ātman everywhere, a devotee gains that insight by which he perceives everything as Brahman. He becomes free from all doubts and is liberated from all Karma. (18)

    [reply]

  • suyash95 8 days ago | +0 points

    Additional content -

     

     casteism was part of everyfeudalistic society in the world. I don't know why people think it was onlypart of Indian society and keep yapping 'hurr hinduism created casteism.’ Birthbased supremacy is also part of every society. From Greek to Persian, everyking claimed to be descendant of a god only and their preists were birth based.

    Even in Iliad, Paris was raised bysheep herders but he still displayed his warrior skills because he was son of aking. The priest's daughter gets abducted by Agamemnon and entire Greek fleetstarts dying of plague but for other women getting abducted and violated therewas no issue but Illiad is enjoyed as great romantic epic of ancient Greekswhereas Hindu epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata are frowned upon by antihindu propagandist who cherry pick verses to defame hinduism by dissecting ourancient scriptures under the modern day morality and microscope.

    In case of Europe itself they had heirarchy where church was at the top, then kings, nobles, knights, peasants,serfs and slaves. The peasants, serfs and slaves weren't even permitted to huntwild animals for food or anything since the animals were considered propertiesof royals which was entirely birth based only. There was capital punishment ifcaught doing such acts. Hindu Brahmins (priest's) are stereotyped for doingthis and that and their history is linked with entire hinduism but history ofchurch is separated from christianity due to the vile level of degeneracy init.

    The church's history is so bad yet it's not discussed. The casteism in feudal societies of Europe ended during industrial revolution and colonisation. When you have entire world to enslave and exploit, you don't need to do the same in your own country but that's allseen as rennaisance affair and their attrocities are to be overlooked. Samegoes for islamic society, Hindu society in comparison was far peaceful.Oppression did exist but for most part of casteism, people of a communitysimply didn't interact with others and kept to themselves. Most of theaccusation of historical attrocities have no base. One line from manusmriti isused as a norm that happened for thousands of years lol.

     




    Caste or “Casta” - is a social construct from thevocabulary of the Portuguese who classified their societies into self-containedunits or “castes”. This classification was applied to the many different andseparate communities they encountered in India.

    Varna literally “colour” refers to one’s colour ofcharacter, not the colour of one’s skin as some detractors have tried to claim.

    cātur-varṇyaṃ mayā sṛṣṭaṃ guṇa karma vibhāgaśaḥ |

    Gita 4:13. The [social] system of four Varṇas was generated byMe according to division of Gunas and Karma.

    In other words the classification of VARNA is based on one’scharacter and deeds, NOT by birth!

    According to the Mahabharata all humans are inherently Brahmins.

    na viśeṣo-sti varṇānāṃ sarvam brāhmam idaṁ jagat | brahmaṇāpūrva sṛṣṭhā hi karmabhir varṇatāṃ gatam ||

    In the beginning there was no distinction between the VARNAS,the whole of humankind created by Brahmā consisted of Brahmins only, inconsequence of their actions people have become distinguished into the foursub-groups. (M.B. Santi Parva 188:10)

    ityetaiḥ karmabhir vyastā dvijā varṇāntarā gatāḥ | dharmo yajñakriyā teṣāṃ nityā na pratiṣidhyate ||

    Distinguished by their deeds Brahmins fell and became members ofthe other social orders, thus members of all the four orders have the right topractice dharma and to perform yajña. (M.B. Santi Parva 188:14)

    There are many texts which enumerate the qualities or KPI ‘s thethe different VARNAS.

    yogastapo damo dānā satyā śaucā śrutā ghṛṇā | vidyā vijñanamāstikyam etad brāhmaṇa lakṣaṇam ||

    Discipline, austerity, self-control, liberality, truthfulness,purity, vedic learning, compassion, erudition, intelligence, and religiousfaith — these are the characteristics of a Brahmin. (Vasishtha 6:23)

    dirgha vairam asūyā cāsatyā brāhmaṇa dūṣaṇam | paiśunyamnirdayatvā ca jānīyācchūdra lakṣaṇam ||

    Bearing long grudges, envy, mendacity, reviling spiritualaspirants, slander, and ruthlessness — these should be recognized as thecharacteristics of a Sudra. (Vasishtha 6:24)

    What determines VARNA is one’s character and not birth. This isreiterated countless times.

    na yonir nāpi sāskāro na śātā na ca sātatiḥ | kāraṇānidvijatvasya vṛttam eva tu kāraṇam ||

    The cause of brahminhood is not birth, or sacraments, orlearning or progeny, good conduct alone is the cause. (Anusasana Parva 143:50)

    satyam,dānam, kṣamā, śīlam anṛśāsyam tapo ghṛṇā | dṛśyante yatra nāgendra sa brāhmaṇaiti smṛtiḥ ||

    O King of serpents, he in whom are manifest truthfulness,charity, forbearance, good conduct, absence of malice, austerity and compassionis a Brahmana according to the sacred tradition.

    yatraitallakṣyate sarpa vṛttam sa brāhmaṇas smṛtaḥ | yatraitan na bhavet sarvam tamśūdram iti nirdiśet ||

    O serpent he in whom this [afore mentioned] conduct is manifestis a Brahmana, he in whom this is absent treat all such as Sudra. (M.B.Aranya-parva 180. 20, 27.)

    yasya yallakṣaṇā proktā pūso varṇābhi vyañjakam |. yad anyatrāpidṛśyeta tat tenaiva vinirdiśet ||

    If the qualities pertaining to a certain VARNA are seen inanother VARNA, then the later are to be classified as belonging to the former. (BhagavatamSk. 7; Adhy. 11;35.)

    Jāti - refers to the ancient professional oroccupational guilds when society consisted of Nobles, Priests, Farmers,Laborers & Artisansm and were arranged into vocational guilds.

    The Veda itself has very little to say about the “Caste-system”as is practiced today which is institutionalised and systemic discrimination.

    The division of a society into the four classical estates ofpriests, nobles, farmers and serfs which was universal in almost every ancientcivilisation and certainly not unique to India is mentioned in Rig Veda in thePurusha Suktam.

    The four social estates are mentioned again in Sukla Yajur Vedawithout any hint of favour, privilege or prejudice but inclusively as valuedmembers of society.

    nava-daśabhir astuvata śūdrāryāv asṛjyetām ahorātre ' adhipatnīāstām |

    With nineteen they praised; Sūdra and Arya were created. Day andNight were Royal Ladies. (Sukla Yajur Veda 14: 30)

    yathemāṁ vācaṁ kalyāṇīm āvadāni janebhyaḥ | brahma-rājanyābhyām̐śūdrāya cāryāya ca svāya cāraṇāya | priyo devānāṁ dakṣiṇāyai dātur iha bhūyāsamayaṁ me kāmaḥ samṛdhyatām upa mādo namatu ||

    As I speak these auspicious and beneficial words to the people,to Brahmin and Rajanya, to Sudra and Arya, to kin and stranger, may I be dearto the gods and the giver of gifts in this world. (Sukla Yajur Veda 26:2)

    rucaṁ no dhehi brāhmaṇeṣu rucam̐ rājasu nas kṛdhi | rucaṁviśyeṣu śūdreṣu mayi dhehi rucā rucam ||

    O Agni, give us brilliance among brahmins, brilliance amongkings, brilliance among vaishyas and sudras, give to me brilliance with beauty.(Sukla Yajur Veda 18:48).

    yad grāme yad araṇye yat sabhāyāṁ yad indriye | yacchūdre yadarye yad enaś cakṛmā vayaṁ yad ekasyādhi dharmaṇi tasyāvayajanam asi ||

    whatever offense we have committed in village, in forest, inassembly and by our physical power, against sudra or arya whatever offense wehave committed against another, you are our means of expiation. (Sukla YajurVeda 20:17).

    The really nasty, racist, discriminative declarations and rulesof exclusion and inclusion and oppression and discrimination based on one’sbirth estate are found in the Dharma Shastras.

    These social divisions and social engineering projects have longpassed their use-by-date, in fact that starting happening with the industrialrevolution. So its high time that we now ditch these outmoded ways ofdiscriminatory thinking and apply principle of equality and diversity to allregardless of race, class, gender or sexual orientation or any other attribute.

    Let us allow the Holy Gita to have the final word in this matterand provide the highest standard of behaviour and interpersonal conduct for allof us.

    yo māṁ paśyati sarvatra sarvaṁ ca mayi paśyati | tasyāhaṁ napraṇaśyāmi sa ca me na praṇaśyati || 30 ||

    Gita6:30. He who sees Me everywhere and everything in Me; I am not separated fromhim and he is never separated from Me.

    sarva-bhūta-sthitaṁ yo māṁ bhajaty-ekatvam-āsthitaḥ | sarvathāvartmāno’pi sa yogī mayi vartate || 31 ||

    Gita6:31. The Yogi who, established in unity, worships (bhajati) Me dwellingin all beings, he abides in Me, howsoever he may live.

    aham ātmā guḍākeśa sarva bhūtāśaya sthitaḥ | aham ādiśca madhyaṃca bhūtānām anta eva ca || 20 ||

    Gita10:20. I am the Self, O Gudakesha (Arjuna —Conqueror-of-sleep), dwelling in thehearts of all beings. I verily am the beginning, the middle and also the end ofall beings.

    vidyā vinaya saṁpanne brāhmaṇe gavi hastini | śuni caiva śvapākeca paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ || 5:18 ||

    5:18. The sages regard with equality a person well-endowed withlearning and humility, a Brahmana (who is so merely by birth), a cow, anelephant, a dog and a dog-eater.

    sarva-bhūtastham ātmānaṁ sarva-bhūtāni cātmani | īkṣateyoga-yuktātmā sarvatra sama-darśanaḥ || 6:29 ||

    Gita 6:29 With the mind harmonised by Yoga one sees equality everywhere; one seesone’s Self as abiding in all beings and all beings in one’s own Self. (6:29)

    loka saṅgraham-evāpi saṁpaśyan kartum arhasi || 3: 20 ||

    Indeed,you should act, bearing in mind thewelfare of the world.

    labhante Brahmā-nirvāṇam ṛṣayaḥ kṣīṇa kalmaṣāḥ | chinna-dvaidhāyatātmanaḥ sarva bhūta hite ratāḥ || 5:25 ||

    Thesages who are free from the pairs of opposites, whose minds are well directedand who are devoted to the welfare ofall beings, become cleansed of all impurities and attain the bliss ofthe Brahman.

    te prāpnuvanti mām-eva sarva-bhūta-hite-ratāḥ || 12;4 ||

    They too obtain me who are dedicated to the welfare of all beings.

     

    Claim -Is varna proclaimation publicly also a good thing even if bykarma and guna or by character and deeds? Is it quantifiable? Maybe onlyBhagwan can tell but can we?

    Also who decides what is someone's varna? At what time? For whatpurpose? What gives the right? Can it be self decided with honest assessment?

    Response - This is all THEORY it is not law. They are guidelines forpersonal practice.

    Its like sociologists and psychologists have criteria forcategorising and diagnosis - its called typology. If you know a person isautistic then you will modify your behaviour accordingly. And if you know theyare depressive then again your will modify your behaviour.

    So read the verses again - it gives the qualities of a “brahmin”- so if you encounter a random person and they exhibit those same qualities,then you are to behave towards them and treat them as a brahmin.

    If you encounter a random person who may even be outwardly a“brahmin” and they exhibit the qualities of a Sudra then they are be treated assuch.

    But in your public life just treat everyone with the samerespect and dignity and don’t concern yourself about who or what they. In yourprivate life perhaps you should apply the criteria when contractingfriendships.

     

     

    The caste/classsystem was a social arrangement which existed in every ancient sophisticatedsociety. From Ancient Egypt to Victorian England, the Middle East to China.

    All societies were divided up intoroughly four “estates” Nobility, Clergy, Merchants and farmers/peasants/serfs.

    Even today there are class/powerhierarchies in every society even communist.

    The unit of an ancient pre-industrialsociety was the extended family; a large number of families working in the sameprofession constituted a jāti. The extended family fulfilled all thosefunctions which are now fulfilled by the market and the government. Education,employment, health care, insurance, old age care, arranging of marriages,child-care and resolution of family disputes. Those matters which could not beresolved within the extended family were referred for arbitration to theelected governing body of the jāti community known as the panchayat.Each and every jāti was autonomous and took care of their own members providingtraining, employment, security, super-annuation etc. They decided their ownlaws and rules about marriage, food and personal and inter-personal conduct andevery other aspect of social life. So for example some jātis ate pork and beefand others didn't, some were vegetarian, some drank alcohol and used marijuana,some were matriarchal some were patriarchal, some accepted divorce andremarriage of widows and others didn't. The jāti also resolved land and stockdisputes and also dealt with crime such as theft, murder, rape etc.

     

    The hierarchical power arrangement in ancient India is not what ispopularly parroted. According to the Buddhist and Jain texts, the Nobles orKṣatriyas were the highest caste.

    According to the Brahminical works (authored by Brahmins) thePriests or Brahmins are the highest in the hierarchy.

    According to realpolitik, and what we know of other cultures, theNobility were always in every culture higher than the clergy for the simplereason that real power was in their hands and the Priests derived any powerthey had solely from the consensus of their personal patrons (yajamānas).

    In other words the King held absolute power over the entirekingdom and had exclusive use of coercion and force. The priests were disunitedand disparate with individual fiefdoms (yajamāni-system) comprised of theirclient families - they had no power of coercion whatsoever.

    The Vedic position is that there are two sources of power (brahma-kṣatram);worldly power is in the hands of the Nobles, and spiritual power in in thehands of the Priests. Priests were often retained as ministers and advisers bythe Royalty but the kings were under no obligation or had any imperative tofollow their advice.

    The Priests would perform yajñas and ceremonies for the benefit,prosperity and power of the Kings and the Kings would in turn patronise theBrahmins and bestow land and cattle upon them - so it was a symbioticrelationship with the Kings dominating.

    With colonisation from the West and the waning of Royal Patronage,the political influence of the Brahmins declined until they became almostirrelevant. They managed to reassert their influence by aligning themselveswith the British Colonial government and adopting western education with greatenthusiasm. They were drafted into influential positions in the ColonialApparatus as clerks, accountants, managers, teachers, lawyers, judges, advisorsetc.

    And the interesting historical fact is the majority of ancientIndian royal dynasties were actual of the Sudra caste - so they had in manycases become the Nobility and thus held real power over Brahmins.

    Everything about India is complex, multi-layered and confusing -simple formulae and paradigms do not apply. Everything you say about India isboth right and wrong depending on time-place-circumstance.

     

    The position as laid out by orthodox acharyassuch as even the Puri Shankaracharya is that varna vyavastha is foremost aritual system, not temporal, so Brahmins aren't necessarily meant to bepolitical or economic elites (although people might cross the wires) and arefrequently at the mercy of patrons. The tone and demands of some Smritis to meactually betray a sense of insecurity about that fact…

    Irony is they make fun of the so called castesystem when they have the concept of god's chosen people

    the majority of ancient Indian royal dynasties were actual of the Sudracaste

    Maurya dynasty

    Chandragupta Maurya — the Brahmin Chanakya actually selected himto become king by destroying the Nanda dynasty which was Kshatriya!!!

    Bimbisara (son of Chandragupta Maurya)

    Ashoka (son of Bimbisara)

    Chalukya dynasty of Badami — ruled Deccan and south India for700 years (6th-12th centuries)

    The kings of this dynasty such as Pulakeshi II were greatpatrons of Vedic religion and the mainstream Hindu culture, art, literature andarchitecture

    Rashtrakuta dynasty — ruled Deccan and south India for nearly300 years between 8th and 11th centuries

    Once again the great kings of this dynasty promoted and nurturedclassical Hinduism and was also responsible for the exquisitely beautiful cavetemples in Ellora (e.g. Kailasanatha Temple)

    Chola dynasty — ruled the Tamil country for nearly 350 years(10th-13th centuries)

    Rajaraja and his son Rajendra were great patrons of Hinduism andVedic religion, and their trade relations with southeast Asia also carriedHinduism and Buddhism to that region.

    Vijayanagara empire —

    Famously the Brahmin Svami Vidyaranya chose the Shudras Hariharaand Bukkaraya to lead an organized revival of a Hindu empire to thwart theincursion of Islam in south India.

    The second generation king Kumara Kampana rescued the Tamilregion from Muslim rule

    Krishnadevaraya continued to strengthen the empire and it becamea bastion of classical Hinduism all across India, and attracted scholars,musicians, artists from all over India. Temple architecture developed a newstyle with the tall imposing “Raya Gopurams” named for the Vijayanagara Kings (“Rayas”).

    Chandela dynasty — ruled central India between 9th and 13thcenturies

    These kings were of tribal origin, but established a strongHindu kingdom and patronized the Vedic religion and all-rounded Hindu culture,arts, music, philosophy, etc

    They built the legendary Khajuraho temple complex

    They were a major resistance against early Muslim invasions ofGhaznavi and Ghori

    Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty — ruled over western India between 8thand 12th centuries

    Rajput kingdoms — famously valiant and fierce defenders of thewestern frontier of India and followers and patrons of Hinduism

    Maratha empire — Shivaji was a Shudra and he was educated bySamarth Ramdas. Shivaji is famous for a second revival of Hinduism after thefall of Vijayanagara and for bringing the downfall of the Mughal empire andresisting the British takeover of vast parts of India for nearly a century.

     

     

    the standard reiterated IDEAL perpetuated by the Brahmins. Thequestion is what is the REALPOLITIK.

    BTW ”Bhramin” is one who is deluded, from the root BHRM. Theactual caste is called Brāhmaṇa.

    These was also a caste-mobility - after the Gupta period thevaishyas went into banking and trading and the Sudras became the land-ownersand primary producers as well as the artisans and craftsmen.

     

    Caste Hierarchy-

    REAL power was in the hands of the Kings in EVERY kingdom on theface of the earth.

     

    Sounds like the standard books found inlibraries. There is no such pyramid. This is all made up. The academics andpriests in this diagram identified as brahmins are supposed to the poorest,while in reality people who call themselves as brahmins are wealthy doinganything but priests job.

    The influence and relevance of the Shankaracharyas is confinedto the Smārta Brahmin community and of course those who choose to accept theirauthority.

    Theoretically at least all Hindu monks of the Dasa-nāmi orders(other than the Shaivites and Vaishnavas) are associated with one or other ofthe four Pontifical seats, but they are under no obligation or control of thePontiffs of those seats and mostly act independently of them.

     some jātis ate porkand beef and others didn't,”

    Beef eating was very rare among hindujatis, some “untouchable”(in a historical context) castes associated withleather industry used to consume.

    Even tribals outside hindu fold arenot known to consume beef(though pork was very common among them).

     

    Chandalas were employed in crematorium burning the bodies and in slaughtering animals and also as executioners. Theywere left alone for the most part to live in their own areas and do their ownthing.

    People avoided socialising with them.

    The idea that Chandalas were randomlyoppressed is false because they had immense coercive power. So if they wereoffended they could hold industrial action and stop all cremations! Can youimagine what effect that would have?

    There are several accounts from theBritish that unit sweepers who were abused by the white officers often went onstrike until an apology and restitution was given.

     

    there has been an evolution of the caste system since it first inceptionseveral millenia ago. A gradual progression which is documented in the texts.

    When the nomadic herdsmen settled down into farming communities thesocial hierarchy consisted of warriors (kṣatriyas), priests (brahmins),farmers/cattle breeders (vaishyas) and laborers (sūdras).

    As society evolved and became more complex and sophisticated withinternational trade (circa 300 BCE) the labourer class i.e. sūdras took tovarious manufacturing occupations which were in big demand including carpentry,construction, stone-masonry, weaving, metal-work, gold and silver-smithery,pottery, ceramics etc. and became independent master craftsmen with their ownguilds and hierarchies.

    The Vaishyas became the bankers/investors (jagat-seths whofinanced both the Mughals and the British), traders, merchants, entrepreneurs,etc. and left farming and stock-breeding to Sūdras who became landlords andprimary producers and who also took up trading in competition with theVaishyas.

    By the beginning of the Common era, the Vaishyas and upwardly mobileSudras - in particular the five powerful “Vishvakarma” castes (Carpenters,Goldsmiths, blacksmiths, brass-smiths, stonemasons, began to merge into onelarge economic bloc which has remained the case till today. The fiveVishvakarma castes began to vie with the Brahmins in superiority and claimed ahigher status than them - since the Brahmins had to rely on them for all thesacramental needs.

    It must be noted that the Sūdras were divided into two groups - Sacchudras- where those who did “pure” work such as farmers, potters, metal workers,weaving, carpentry, traders etc. and Asacchudras - those who wereemployed in “impure” professions - sanitary workers, butchers, tanners,cobblers, executioners, crematorium workers. These are the groups who are nowknown as “Dalits”.

    It must also be noted that the majority of Hindu kings from the NandaDynasty 364/345 BCE till the 19th century were from the Sūdra community. (Thisfact alone shatters the Marxist propaganda that the Sudras are the oppressedproletariate who were always exploited by the privileged Brahmins.)

    In spite of these seismic shifts in the social landscape of India,writers still insist on the simplistic pre-industrial categories of warriors,priests, farmers and labourers.

    From a Hindu religious perspective today there are only two classes ofHindus - Brahmins and Non-Brahmins. Brahmins being those priests who stillactually live according to the rules and regulations and maintain theirtraditional observances.

     

     

     

    Is the caste/Varna/Jati system ordained in any of theVedas, Bhagavad Gita and/or other shrutis?

     

    Caste or “Casta” - is a socialconstruct from the vocabulary of the Portuguese who classified their societiesinto self-contained units or “castes”. This classification was applied to themany different and separate communities they encountered in India.

    Varna literally “colour” refers toone’s colour of character, not the colour of one’s skin as some detractors havetried to claim.

    cātur-varṇyaṃ mayā sṛṣṭaṃ guṇa karmavibhāgaśaḥ |

    Gita 4:13. The [social] system of fourVarṇas was generated by Me according to division of Gunas and Karma.

    In other words the classification ofVARNA is based on one’s character and deeds, NOT by birth!

    According to the Mahabharata allhumans are inherently Brahmins.

    na viśeṣo-sti varṇānāṃ sarvam brāhmamidaṁ jagat | brahmaṇā pūrva sṛṣṭhā hi karmabhir varṇatāṃ gatam ||

    In the beginning there was nodistinction between the VARNAS, the whole of humankind created by Brahmāconsisted of Brahmins only, in consequence of their actions people have becomedistinguished into the four sub-groups. (M.B. Santi Parva 188:10)

    ityetaiḥ karmabhir vyastā dvijāvarṇāntarā gatāḥ | dharmo yajña kriyā teṣāṃ nityā na pratiṣidhyate ||

    Distinguished by their deeds Brahminsfell and became members of the other social orders, thus members of all thefour orders have the right to practice dharma and to perform yajña. (M.B. SantiParva 188:14)

    There are many texts which enumeratethe qualities or KPI ‘s the the different VARNAS.

    yogastapo damo dānā satyā śaucā śrutāghṛṇā | vidyā vijñanam āstikyam etad brāhmaṇa lakṣaṇam ||

    Discipline, austerity, self-control,liberality, truthfulness, purity, vedic learning, compassion, erudition,intelligence, and religious faith — these are the characteristics of a Brahmin.(Vasishtha 6:23)

    dirgha vairam asūyā cāsatyā brāhmaṇadūṣaṇam | paiśunyam nirdayatvā ca jānīyācchūdra lakṣaṇam ||

    Bearing long grudges, envy, mendacity,reviling spiritual aspirants, slander, and ruthlessness — these should berecognized as the characteristics of a Sudra. (Vasishtha 6:24)

    What determines VARNA is one’scharacter and not birth. This is reiterated countless times.

    na yonir nāpi sāskāro na śātā na casātatiḥ | kāraṇāni dvijatvasya vṛttam eva tu kāraṇam ||

    The cause of brahminhood is not birth,or sacraments, or learning or progeny, good conduct alone is the cause.(Anusasana Parva 143:50)

    satyam, dānam, kṣamā,śīlam anṛśāsyam tapo ghṛṇā | dṛśyante yatra nāgendra sa brāhmaṇa iti smṛtiḥ ||

    O King of serpents, he in whom aremanifest truthfulness, charity, forbearance, good conduct, absence of malice,austerity and compassion is a Brahmana according to the sacred tradition.

    yatraital lakṣyatesarpa vṛttam sa brāhmaṇas smṛtaḥ | yatraitan na bhavet sarvam tam śūdram itinirdiśet ||

    O serpent he in whom this [aforementioned] conduct is manifest is a Brahmana, he in whom this is absent treat allsuch as Sudra. (M.B. Aranya-parva 180. 20, 27.)

    yasya yallakṣaṇā proktā pūso varṇābhivyañjakam |. yad anyatrāpi dṛśyeta tat tenaiva vinirdiśet ||

    If the qualities pertaining to acertain VARNA are seen in another VARNA, then the later are to be classified asbelonging to the former. (Bhagavatam Sk. 7; Adhy. 11;35.)

    Jāti - refers to the ancientprofessional or occupational guilds when society consisted of Nobles, Priests,Farmers, Laborers & Artisansm and were arranged into vocational guilds.

    The Veda itself has very little to sayabout the “Caste-system” as is practiced today which is institutionalised andsystemic discrimination.

    The division of a society into thefour classical estates of priests, nobles, farmers and serfs which wasuniversal in almost every ancient civilisation and certainly not unique toIndia is mentioned in Rig Veda in the Purusha Suktam.

    The four social estates are mentionedagain in Sukla Yajur Veda without any hint of favour, privilege or prejudicebut inclusively as valued members of society.

    nava-daśabhir astuvata śūdrāryāvasṛjyetām ahorātre ' adhipatnī āstām |

    With nineteen they praised; Sūdra andArya were created. Day and Night were Royal Ladies. (Sukla Yajur Veda 14: 30)

    yathemāṁ vācaṁ kalyāṇīm āvadānijanebhyaḥ | brahma-rājanyābhyām̐ śūdrāya cāryāya ca svāya cāraṇāya | priyodevānāṁ dakṣiṇāyai dātur iha bhūyāsam ayaṁ me kāmaḥ samṛdhyatām upa mādo namatu||

    As I speak these auspicious andbeneficial words to the people, to Brahmin and Rajanya, to Sudra and Arya, tokin and stranger, may I be dear to the gods and the giver of gifts in thisworld. (Sukla Yajur Veda 26:2)

    rucaṁ no dhehi brāhmaṇeṣu rucam̐rājasu nas kṛdhi | rucaṁ viśyeṣu śūdreṣu mayi dhehi rucā rucam ||

    O Agni, give us brilliance amongbrahmins, brilliance among kings, brilliance among vaishyas and sudras, give tome brilliance with beauty. (Sukla Yajur Veda 18:48).

    yad grāme yad araṇye yat sabhāyāṁ yadindriye | yacchūdre yad arye yad enaś cakṛmā vayaṁ yad ekasyādhi dharmaṇitasyāvayajanam asi ||

    whatever offense we have committed invillage, in forest, in assembly and by our physical power, against sudra orarya whatever offense we have committed against another, you are our means ofexpiation. (Sukla Yajur Veda 20:17).

    The really nasty, racist,discriminative declarations and rules of exclusion and inclusion and oppressionand discrimination based on one’s birth estate are found in the DharmaShastras.

    These social divisions and socialengineering projects have long passed their use-by-date, in fact that startinghappening with the industrial revolution. So its high time that we now ditchthese outmoded ways of discriminatory thinking and apply principle of equalityand diversity to all regardless of race, class, gender or sexual orientation orany other attribute.

    Let us allow the Holy Gita to have thefinal word in this matter and provide the highest standard of behaviour andinterpersonal conduct for all of us.

    yo māṁ paśyati sarvatra sarvaṁ ca mayipaśyati | tasyāhaṁ na praṇaśyāmi sa ca me na praṇaśyati || 30 ||

    Gita 6:30. He whosees Me everywhere and everything in Me; I am not separated from him and he isnever separated from Me.

    sarva-bhūta-sthitaṁ yo māṁbhajaty-ekatvam-āsthitaḥ | sarvathā vartmāno’pi sa yogī mayi vartate || 31 ||

    Gita 6:31. The Yogiwho, established in unity, worships (bhajati) Me dwelling in all beings,he abides in Me, howsoever he may live.

    aham ātmā guḍākeśa sarva bhūtāśayasthitaḥ | aham ādiśca madhyaṃ ca bhūtānām anta eva ca || 20 ||

    Gita 10:20. I am theSelf, O Gudakesha (Arjuna —Conqueror-of-sleep), dwelling in the hearts of allbeings. I verily am the beginning, the middle and also the end of all beings.

    vidyā vinaya saṁpanne brāhmaṇe gavihastini | śuni caiva śvapāke ca paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ || 5:18 ||

    5:18. The sages regard with equality aperson well-endowed with learning and humility, a Brahmana (who is so merely bybirth), a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater.

    sarva-bhūtastham ātmānaṁ sarva-bhūtānicātmani | īkṣate yoga-yuktātmā sarvatra sama-darśanaḥ || 6:29 ||

    Gita 6:29 With the mind harmonised byYoga one sees equality everywhere; one sees one’s Self as abiding in all beingsand all beings in one’s own Self. (6:29)

    loka saṅgraham-evāpi saṁpaśyan kartumarhasi || 3: 20 ||

    Indeed, you shouldact, bearing in mind the welfare of the world.

    labhante Brahmā-nirvāṇam ṛṣayaḥ kṣīṇakalmaṣāḥ | chinna-dvaidhā yatātmanaḥ sarva bhūta hite ratāḥ || 5:25 ||

    The sages who arefree from the pairs of opposites, whose minds are well directed and who aredevoted to the welfare of all beings, become cleansed of all impurities andattain the bliss of the Brahman.

    te prāpnuvanti mām-evasarva-bhūta-hite-ratāḥ || 12;4 ||

    They too obtain me who are dedicatedto the welfare of all beings.

     

    Claim -Is varnaproclaimation publicly also a good thing even if by karma and guna or bycharacter and deeds? Is it quantifiable? Maybe only Bhagwan can tell but canwe?

    Also who decides what is someone'svarna? At what time? For what purpose? What gives the right? Can it be selfdecided with honest assessment?

    Response - This is all THEORY it is not law. They are guidelines for personalpractice.

    Its like sociologists andpsychologists have criteria for categorising and diagnosis - its calledtypology. If you know a person is autistic then you will modify your behaviouraccordingly. And if you know they are depressive then again your will modify yourbehaviour.

    So read the verses again - it givesthe qualities of a “brahmin” - so if you encounter a random person and theyexhibit those same qualities, then you are to behave towards them and treatthem as a brahmin.

    If you encounter a random person whomay even be outwardly a “brahmin” and they exhibit the qualities of a Sudrathen they are be treated as such.

    But in your public life just treateveryone with the same respect and dignity and don’t concern yourself about whoor what they. In your private life perhaps you should apply the criteria whencontracting friendships.

     

     

    [reply]

  • suyash95 8 days ago | +0 points

    egalitarian military structure established by the Kakatiyas - Strong evidence against Caste system was localised at some places only

    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.

    [reply]

  • suyash95 1 day ago | +0 points

    Terms like -

    In any debate or article on Varna-Jaati or Caste system ,one would find exclusive use of these words - InequalityHierarchy,Discrimination,Education Privilege 

    Caste ,Anti-caste ,Anti-Casteism,CasteismHigh,Low,Upper Caste,Manuvaad ,MArginalized ,Indigenous people ImmobilityEndogamyHereditaryBrahminismVarnaOpression , Oppressor-Oppressed,Systemic Caste Oppression,Social Justice/Injustice ,Intersectionality Untoucahbility ,Purity/Impurity , Scriptural Basis ,Casteless , Atrocity ,Structural suppression , depression ,Savarna ,Bahujana ,Dalit ,Pichda ,Shoshit etc


    Hindutva,Hindu Left/Right,Fascism,Natsi,Hindu Supremacism,Extremism,Fundamentalism ,Communalism,Secularism,Conservatism,Traditionalism,Religious Freedom ,religious hatred , bigotry ,Religious Majority , Minority.,Majoritarianism etc.

    [reply]

  • suyash95 3 hours ago | +0 points

    SC/ST Act is a fine eg ofMMM Secular Liberal cabal shaping our narratives.The very premise of this actis against Social Justice. 95% of cases are outrightly false n fraud.

    One will be surprised toknow how the cases of atrocity r reported under this act, If a person forcefullyenters ur home n tries to steal ur money ,if u resist than that person can filea case on u under Sc/St act n it will be counted as atrocity n oppression.Thisis just a tiny sample, Similarly all small quarrels n petty fights r countedunder atrocity even when the parties involved were unaware about each othersidentity.

    Every species has its boundary-evena dog n lion demarcate their area n prevent outsiders from entering that,Nowthe same logic applies to Social Groups, A social group living in an area willnot allow members from other social groups to enter in their personal space ndisturb their privacy(much like we do in our homes).Gated Societies r live egof that

    This Sc/St is a recipe fordisaster - in the sense that Competition,tension,friction always exists amongsocial groups in a society(even in animal kingdom) but here the state isfomenting divisiveness n hatred betwn communities, in no other country one canfind such anomaly ,Imagine a Black Act in US where Black people can randomlyfile cases on White people(even though when the Blacks underwent slavery for1000 years making it a legit case) ,Whites would raise hell.

    Dalit,Sc-St r artificialconstructs made during British Colonial rule,Any Social group can be addedunder the category.

    A perfect society cannever exist,Some amount of discrimination(4-5%) will always exist.

    The entire data is manufactured to justify their premise by MMM Cabal,Normally we have facts  n data n we use them to arrive them at conclusion ,Here ,first the conclusion is derived n than the facts r supplied to fit that, a traversty of injustice, This is based on - the End justify the means.

    Good read - 

    https://www.academia.edu/25376339/The_Impossibility_of_Refuting_or_Confirming_the_Arguments_about_the_Caste_System

    https://www.academia.edu/33841013/Are_There_Caste_Atrocities_in_India_What_the_Data_Can_and_Cannot_Tell_Us

    https://www.academia.edu/38294198/Violence_Against_SCs_How_Absence_of_Reliable_Data_Leads_to_Disaster

    [reply]

  • suyash95 3 hours ago | +0 points

    Other Eg - Nation states protecting their borders not allowing people from other nations to enter without permission akin to Human beings doing this with Aliens

    All the tribes in this World  practise this behaviour

    [reply]

Please Login or Signup to leave Answer