A test of varna other than by birth

[SwamiTaBra]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear

Dear Mr. Swamy,

I am afraid that you have got me all wrong. I NEVER intended to cast any aspersion on the Varnam / or even the caste of Vaishya, nor did I intend to ridicule people engaged in the professions I have listed, at all. If my words give raise to such an interpretation I apologoze unconditionally.

All that I wished to point out was that in today's world it is just not viable at all to maintain the qualities normally associated with a brahmin or a kshatriya or even a sudra and strictly stick to the svadharma of a person - be he a brahmin or a kshatriya or a shudra. Honesty / dishonesty has nothing to do with what I mentioned. A Vaishya, as a matter of fact, is and should be permitted and allowed to make 'profit' in his trade; otherwise, his technique must be a flawed one and he cannot sustain his trade / business. It is NOT at all a sin to make profit as such. But, there often arises a situation when a 'buyer' and 'seller' transact, the buyer at times feels that the seller wishes to make undue profit and complains. On the other hand, the seller feels that he deserves a certain amount of profit for the troubles he has taken to 'produce' whatever he is selling and if the buyer is unwilling to pay, he complains. This scenerario is normal among Vaishyas and cannot be considered immoral or even unethical.

Now, take the case of a Vadhyar. A true brahmin is not expected to be concerned at all with what he is going to get as 'dhakshina' /'sambhavana'. [The Dhaana mantram invariably includes 'yathkinchith', whether it involves a hand-to-mouth poor grahastah, or, a multi-billinaire grahastha.] But, if a Vadhyar is really like that in today's world, chances are that his son in school will have to drop out because he cannot pay the necessary fees, his daughter cannot be married off because he has no money to meet the expenses involved, or his sick mother will die because he cannot buy medicine in time for her and so on and so forth. This argument can be applied with equal validity to others in my list also.

So, when I highlighted the prevailing activities of those I cited, it was NOT done with any intention of faulting them or belittling them. I only pointed out that it is JUST NOT EASY AT ALL to maintain the type of standard / attitude expected to be maintained by a brahmin. Similar things can be said for Kshatriyas also.

I hope I have made my point clear.

I accept your clarification. The wording of the post does give the sense which I perceived earlier.

Rgds.

 

[Vivek_V]

I didn't get time to read this thread, and I haven't read everything. But I came across your Kunjuppu's first post in this:
"why do we bother with all these classifications? the rest of the world has got along great with stratifying their societies along your proposed varna or caste or any other lines."

I agree 100% with you =)

***

Castes have become community idenities and will remain that. The structure of society has changed. Apart from castes, our society does have its modern day varnas too, we should recognize those also and not ill-treat others.
I am sure many here, (myself too) are uncomfortable with this heirarchical structure of society (world through) which leaves many at the bottom without even basic needs.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Vivek_V]

I agree with Sangom - the varna sounds offensive espeically given that castes have become community identities.

"Suppose I say brahmins are of tamas because they don't have to do anything productive for the society but only fool the others with their high-sounding and unproductive vedic chanting, abracadabra, and at times, some high-falluting discussions about afterworld, liberation etc., kshatriyas will have a mix of tamasic and rajasic because, though most of the time they are a burden for the actual producers, in times of war these kshatriyas are of 'some' use, and vaisyas and sudras are satvic because they uncomplainingly toil and produce all the goods and services for the society, will it not have more logic?"

This sounds offensive because at one time, the traits of a person defined the varna, at this point caste is largely based on communities. So such statements seem like they speak of traits of a community. That is why the idea of imposing or speaking of varnas in terms of present day society shouldn't/can't exist. We can take forward those ideals of our past, discerning for ourselves (like what it means to be a kshatriya, brahmana etc). But it isn't best not to impose the terms of the caste system in present society, because it has left bruises socially.

In anycase, for me, job an individual is dedicated to deserves its own respect (even today). I believe in early society too, the varna was not a means to abase someone. Society falls if either of the varnas do.

Still, quiet naturally, some professions (like even today) tend to gain a respect more than others - like teaching, or a doctor or engineer. But not all people have the same temperaments. So, this still shouldn't leave us to disrespect anyone of other legal professions, because all people have their sense of honour and are doing a job worth doing in their part.

Going by the traits of varna, in the absence of.....
.... brahmins, society's identity, tradition, scientific progress lacks - it falls.
.....kshatriyas, in state's absence or military, society is invaded by foreigners - it falls.
.....vaishyas, society's trade falls and neither is there bread for the common man, nor money for the work or defense of the state - it falls.
.....sudras, it leaves society's most basic work unattented, disease and death becomes everywhere - it falls.

This is what I believe, of today's equivalents or varna or of ancient society itself.

Importance seems to have been given to those varna which demanded more respect, or for which it took time for an individual to realise it through learning. This is why the Shudra varna is not considered that of the twice-born, because the occupation required no specific learning. But I do think it important, that it is upto the individual to choose if he wants or doesn't want technical education. Today, many may be interested but don't have money, and ironically others may not and are forced by parents.

As of today, we may say that we recognize the varnas in today's society (more or less), but it still becomes offensive to bring it out because it has left a bruise, and the nature of society itself has changed. Education for one, is no longer optional, it is an imperative for all if they have to survive. Of course, technical eduation is optional, but India has a great task ahead in even basic education.

Though we may recognize the varna system in some measure, it should be considered no more. I can clean my house, study technology and join the army all at the sametime (not that I am joining the army, I wanted to but my parents didn't give the nod).

Btw Sangom, the role of brahmins in early days was much more than abracadabra and reciting mantras. But I understand your point. What I don't understand is why you seem to have such a low opinion of your own community.

Have anyone of you read Amish Tripathi's Immortals of Meluha? He presents and intresting case of the varna system, and even the "maika" system in his semi-fiction in which he seems to have written his own opinion of how the varna system was originally.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[g_anand]

This is potentially a vast topic. While we may wish away caste divisions, the fact of the matter is that we still have it and need to face it with the right understanding.
In my opinion, the only justifiable reasons for the four varnas could be to have a society in harmony with nature. However, it is true that the caste system has now become
a headache or even a migraine - but it would be foolish to chop one's head for this reason! It is a fact that people are endowed with different
nature or tendencies. Again, a believer in rebirth would also need to reason that one's varna by birth cannot be by chance. The best thing would then be to do the
duties ordained for the varna in which one is born without any prejudice to the other varnas. To quote late Sri Narayana Guru, each higher caste should treat the
lower castes as younger siblings.

 

[sangom]

I agree with Sangom - the varna sounds offensive espeically given that castes have become community identities.

"Suppose I say brahmins are of tamas because they don't have to do anything productive for the society but only fool the others with their high-sounding and unproductive vedic chanting, abracadabra, and at times, some high-falluting discussions about afterworld, liberation etc., kshatriyas will have a mix of tamasic and rajasic because, though most of the time they are a burden for the actual producers, in times of war these kshatriyas are of 'some' use, and vaisyas and sudras are satvic because they uncomplainingly toil and produce all the goods and services for the society, will it not have more logic?"

This sounds offensive because at one time, the traits of a person defined the varna, at this point caste is largely based on communities. So such statements seem like they speak of traits of a community. That is why the idea of imposing or speaking of varnas in terms of present day society shouldn't/can't exist. We can take forward those ideals of our past, discerning for ourselves (like what it means to be a kshatriya, brahmana etc). But it isn't best not to impose the terms of the caste system in present society, because it has left bruises socially.

In anycase, for me, job an individual is dedicated to deserves its own respect (even today). I believe in early society too, the varna was not a means to abase someone. Society falls if either of the varnas do.

Still, quiet naturally, some professions (like even today) tend to gain a respect more than others - like teaching, or a doctor or engineer. But not all people have the same temperaments. So, this still shouldn't leave us to disrespect anyone of other legal professions, because all people have their sense of honour and are doing a job worth doing in their part.

Going by the traits of varna, in the absence of.....
.... brahmins, society's identity, tradition, scientific progress lacks - it falls.
.....kshatriyas, in state's absence or military, society is invaded by foreigners - it falls.
.....vaishyas, society's trade falls and neither is there bread for the common man, nor money for the work or defense of the state - it falls.
.....sudras, it leaves society's most basic work unattented, disease and death becomes everywhere - it falls.

This is what I believe, of today's equivalents or varna or of ancient society itself.

Importance seems to have been given to those varna which demanded more respect, or for which it took time for an individual to realise it through learning.[

Shri Vivek,

If we are talking of "varna" only then what you say is correct. But how do you explain (1) there was hardly any scientific progress till 9th. or 10th. century when (according to you, if I have understood your pov correctly) the varna system was in vogue and added to that our ancient sages had "divya cakShus" and "trikaala jnaana"? They just could not foresee the invasion from outside nor could they discover in advance of the arabs, the gun powder, though much energy was utilised to commit to memory the thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of the four vedas and the braahmana texts by the braahmana varna!

The kshatriyas failed miserably before the marauding foreigners and were rendered virtually helpless before cannon balls; no braahmana, no kshatriya could utilise one brahmastra even once against the enemies at any time.

Btw Sangom, the role of brahmins in early days was much more than abracadabra and reciting mantras. But I understand your point. What I don't understand is why you seem to have such a low opinion of your own community.

If what I wrote just above is not convincing enough for you to feel that what our brahmins did was mere abracadabra, kindly explain what additional, or higher, or greater duties they performed?

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom

"But how do you explain (1) there was hardly any scientific progress till 9th. or 10th. century when (according to you, if I have understood your pov correctly) the varna system was in vogue and added to that our ancient sages had "divya cakShus" and "trikaala jnaana"? They just could not foresee the invasion from outside nor could they discover in advance of the arabs, the gun powder, though much energy was utilised to commit to memory the thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of the four vedas and the braahmana texts by the braahmana varna!"

There was more significant contributions before the 9th, 10th century from India, than after it.

But I agree we didn't develop scientifically or ideologically fast enough, to save our civilization in recent times, and we need to now.

"The kshatriyas failed miserably before the marauding foreigners and were rendered virtually helpless before cannon balls; no braahmana, no kshatriya could utilise one brahmastra even once against the enemies at any time."

Well the whole society I believe failed.

There was no politically unifying ideology in India. Many ideologies flourished, and every diversity, with even a large population left people to be small groups of different beliefs and ways of life, while other parts of the world came together.

We notice also that the Arab world expanded at a time when Islam became the unifying force. Likewise, Genghis Khan of Mongols or Alexander of Macedonia uniting the Mongolian and Greek tribes/clans. Same with the North European clans which were unified under Christianity at around the rise of the German Roman Empire (1st Reich).

In India, there was no movements of the sort in the time. Today, I don't think its safe to regard religion as the unifying force, but nationalism. This is why Indian nationalism faces a challenge to define "Indian" amidst so many languages and culture.

Not that it can't be defined, it can, but it needs to still be done. Our forefathers attempted it, and they politically unified the nation, but psychologically it is still divided on basis of religion, castes. Multi-culturalism is fine, as long as we are able to co-exist without hostilities and define a banner under which we all come.

"If what I wrote just above is not convincing enough for you to feel that what our brahmins did was mere abracadabra, kindly explain what additional, or higher, or greater duties they performed?"

Brahmins didn't just do abracadabra. They did develop certain sciences, and the ancient world had a great deal of contributions of Indians. I do agree however that this fell off in time, and was nil by the colonial era. Today we have some remainings of Ayurveda etc, but we need to contribute much more.

I deride the idea that brahmins could have gained respect by just doing abracadabra, or by just lauding themselves. There are indeed many ideals of brahmins, and way of life from which we can take inspiration even today.

So I don't feel the correct place of brahmins is to be ridiculed or hated, or that brahmins have to feel apologetic, unproud, or feel that hatred towards them is justified.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[biswa]

Merit above all

I feel the members of this forum have fairly explored the many sides of this issue. In an ideal world, everything would be decided by merit, instead of which family, caste or village one was born in. If a "Shudra" can recite all the 4 vedas let him be a priest! Why "he"; if a woman (earlier women were not considered in any high caste) can recite all the vedas, let her be a priestess (assuming it is indeed a requirement to know the vedas by heart).

Unfortunately, the world is not ideal. Therefore a priest will try to secure priesthood for his son regardless of the level of competence and a king will try to pass on his kingdom to his offspring. A trader will bequeath his business to his children. Even today this is valid. Hence castes & communities were invented to protect respective domains.

There may also be a small matter of genetics, usually a strong man's son will be strong and a bespectacled scholar's son will be scholarly. Perhaps because of genes as well as environment. But there are always exceptions like Abdul Kalaam being more learned than many Brahmins, a brahmin like Sachin Tendulkar being a better sportsman than many Kshatriyas, TTK being a better businessman than Vaishyas and so on.

But let them prove themselves! If our vibrant democracy decides to elect Brahmins one after another as PMs (Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Narasimha Rao, Vajpayee), we should! If we decide to elect an extremely learned sardar like Manmohan Singh, that is our right as well.

Decide by merit, not by birth!

 

[sangom]

Sri Sangom

"But how do you explain (1) there was hardly any scientific progress till 9th. or 10th. century when (according to you, if I have understood your pov correctly) the varna system was in vogue and added to that our ancient sages had "divya cakShus" and "trikaala jnaana"? They just could not foresee the invasion from outside nor could they discover in advance of the arabs, the gun powder, though much energy was utilised to commit to memory the thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of the four vedas and the braahmana texts by the braahmana varna!"

There was more significant contributions before the 9th, 10th century from India, than after it.

But I agree we didn't develop scientifically or ideologically fast enough, to save our civilization in recent times, and we need to now.

Dear Shri Vivek,

You have very shrewdly used the term "in recent times" above and also state subsequently that "They did develop certain sciences, and the ancient world had a great deal of contributions of Indians. I do agree however that this fell off in time, and was nil by the colonial era."

Here again the time frame has been stretched to british conquest. Just, however, to let you know that the so-called scientifically minded and trained, and probably possessing "divya cakshus'', the brahmins or, for that matter, the ancient society based on genuine "varna by guna" norms proclaimed by the gita (according to you, but I differ FYI), was no better even in the very beginning of the 8th century A.D. I am giving an extract from this webpage below, and similar accounts can be seen in other authors - both Indian and foreign - also:

"The first and only Arab invasion of the land of the Ganges coincided in date with two other signal successes of Mohammedan arms in distant parts of the globe. Gothic Spain was shattered at the battle of the Guadalete in 710; the standards of Islam were carried from Samarkand to Kashghar in 711-14; and the valley of the Indus was invaded in 712. These three steps mark the zenith of the power of the Omayyad caliphate, and coincide with the administration of one of the ablest and most relentless of all Moslem statesmen. Al-Hajjaj, the governor of Chaldaea, sent Kutaiba north to spread Islam over the borders of Tartary, and at the same time dispatched his own cousin, Mohammad ibn Kasim, to India. The reigning caliph consented unwillingly; he dreaded the distance, the cost, and the loss of life. Even in those days, to adapt modem phrases, there were the opposing policies of “Little Arabians " and *' Imperialists." Al-Hajjaj was imperialist to the core, and to him the Arabs owed the impulse which gave them all they ever won in India. The story of Mohammad ibn Kasim's adventures is one of the romances of history. He was but seventeen, and he was venturing into a region scarcely touched as yet by Saracen spears, a land inhabited by warlike races, possessed of an ancient and deeply rooted civilization— there to found a government which, however successful, would be the loneliest in the whole vast Mohammedan empire, a province cut off by sea, by mountains, and by desert from all peoples of kindred race and faith. Youth and high spirit, however, forbade alike fear and foreboding. The young general had at least six thousand picked horsemen at his back, chosen from the caliph's veterans, with an equal number of camelry, and was supplied with a baggage-train of three thousand Bactrian camels. Marching through Mekran, along the Persian coast, he was joined by the provincial governor with more troops; and five stone-slings for siege-work were sent by sea to meet him at Daibul, or Debal, in Sind, the great mediaeval port of the Indus valley and forerunner of the modem city of Karachi. There at Daibul, in the spring of 712, Mohammad ibn Kasim set up his catapults and dug his trench. A description of this siege has come down to us from the early historian al-Baladhuri (about 840), from which it appears that the Arab spearmen were drawn up along the trench, each separate company under its own banner, and that five hundred men were stationed to work the heavy catapult named *' the Bride." A great red flag flaunted on the top of a tall Hindu temple, and the order came from Hajjaj, with whom the general was in constant communication, to "fix the stone-sling and shorten its foot and aim at the flagstaff." So the gunners lowered the trajectory and brought down the pole with a shrewd shot. The fall of the sacred flag dismayed the garrison; a sortie was repulsed with loss; the Moslems brought ladders and scaled the walls, and the place was carried by storm. The governor fled, the Brahmans were butchered, and after three days of carnage a Mohammedan quarter was laid out, a mosque built, and a garrison of four thousand men detached to hold the city. After the storming of Daibul, the young general arched ups the right bank of the Indus in search of the main body of the enemy. Discovering their outposts on the other side, he tied a string of boats together, filled them with archers, made one end fast to the west bank, and then let the whole floating bridge drift down and across, like an angler's cast of flies, till it touched the opposite side, where it was made fast to stakes milder cover of the archers' arrows. The enemy, unable to oppose the landing, fell back upon Rawer, where the Arabs beheld for the first time the imposing array of Hindu chiefs, mounted on armored war-elephants, and led by their king Dasher. Naphtha arrows, however, threw the elephants into confusion and set fire to the howdahs; the king was slain, the Hindus fled, and “the Moslems were glutted with slaughter." The Indian women showed the desperate courage for which they were famous. The king's sister called them together, on seeing the defeat of their men; and, refusing to owe their lives to the “vile cow-eaters " at the price of dishonor, they set their houses ablaze and perished in the flames. Another victory at Brahman bad opened the way to Molten, the chief city of the upper Indus, which surrendered at discretion, but not without an exhausting siege. The fighting men were massacred, and the priests, workmen, women, and children were made captives. The fall of Molten laid the Indus valley at the feet of the conqueror. The tribes came in, " ringing bells and beating drums and dancing," in token of welcome. The Hindu rulers had oppressed them heavily, and the Jats and Meds and other tribes were on the side of the invaders. The work of conquest, as often happened in India, was thus aided by the disunion of the inhabitants, and jealousies of race and creed conspired to help the Moslems. To such suppliants Mohammad ibn Kasim gave the liberal terms that the Arabs usually offered to all but inveterate foes. He imposed the customary poll tax, took hostages for good conduct, and spared the people's lands and lives. He even left their shrines undesecrated: '* the temples," he proclaimed, “shall be inviolate, like the churches of the Christians, the synagogues of the Jews, and the altars of the Magians." There was worldly wisdom in this toleration, for the pilgrims' dues paid to the temples formed an important source of revenue, and the Moslems found it expedient to compound with idolatry, as a vain thing but lucrative, in the interests of the public treasury. Occasional looting of Hindu fanes took place—we read of ** a cart-load of four-armed idols " sent as a suitable gift to the caliph, who no doubt preferred piece—but such demonstrations were probably rare sops to the official conscience, and as a rule the Mohammedan government of Molten was at once tolerant and economic. The citizens and villagers were allowed to furnish the tax-collectors themselves; the Brahmans were protected and entrusted with high offices, for which their education made them indispensable; and the conqueror's instructions to all his officers were wise and conciliatory:—" Deal honestly," he commanded, " between the people and the governor; if there be distribution, distribute equitably, and fix the revenue according to the ability to pay. Be in concord among yourselves, and wrangle not, that the country be not vexed." The young general's fate was tragic. A new caliph succeeded who was no friend to the conqueror of Sind. Hajjaj was dead, and there was none to oppose factious intrigues at the distant court of Damascus. In spite of his brilliant achievements, Mohammad ibn Kasim was disgraced and put to death. The story runs that he was accused of having made too free with the captive daughters of Dahir before presenting them to the caliph's harem, and that he was punished for the presumption by being sewn up alive in a raw cowhide. “Three days afterward the bird of life arose from his body and soared to heaven; " and the hide with its noble burden was sent to Damascus. The young hero had made no protest, never questioned the death-warrant, but submitted to the executioners with the fearless dignity he had shown throughout his short but valiant life. When the sacrifice was accomplished, however, the Indian princesses, moved perhaps by the courage of a victim brave as their own devoted race, confessed that their tale was deliberately invented to avenge their father's death upon his conqueror. The caliph in impotent fury had them dragged at horses' tails through the city till they perished miserably, but the second crime was no expiation for the first."

It will be clearly noticed that the great brahmins or equally great kshatriyas of those times - all selected and admitted into their respective varnas according to their innate gunas, as indicated by the Lord himself - could not even think of a contraption like the sling machine, nor could they (even if an argument is put forward that they never wanted to attack, were guided by the noblest of ideals, etc.,) foresee - either pragmatically as kshatriyas who are born to fight when called upon by dharma, die -if need be - in battle, and attain veeraswarga (as per the gist of krishna's advice to arjuna in BG) - that others would attack them and take effective defence strategies. The all-wise brahmins also did not manifest any wisdom to know what was happening across the border (just a large desert, no mountains, etc.,) either through their divine sight or by rustic wisdom. Finally, when the conquerors started ruling, the brahmins immediately took up the "high offices" forsaking their ordained swadharma claim. So much for the glorious past when "varna" by gunas was prevalent.

My request to you is, kindly furnish with supporting evidence such as the above, an account of the (some) period when majority of the aryan population followed the norm of determining a person's varna by his inborn gunas.

Please also note the remark in the extract above, "The fall of Molten laid the Indus valley at the feet of the conqueror. The tribes came in, " ringing bells and beating drums and dancing," in token of welcome. The Hindu rulers had oppressed them heavily, and the Jats and Meds and other tribes were on the side of the invaders."

Hence, I believe the time limit for "the failure of the society" to which you refer in the subsequent portion will have to be moved at least to A.D. 712!, and not when the british came in.

I am eagerly awaiting your answer evading these issues!!

 

[sravna]

Shri Vivek,

If we are talking of "varna" only then what you say is correct. But how do you explain (1) there was hardly any scientific progress till 9th. or 10th. century when (according to you, if I have understood your pov correctly) the varna system was in vogue and added to that our ancient sages had "divya cakShus" and "trikaala jnaana"? They just could not foresee the invasion from outside nor could they discover in advance of the arabs, the gun powder, though much energy was utilised to commit to memory the thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of the four vedas and the braahmana texts by the braahmana varna!

The kshatriyas failed miserably before the marauding foreigners and were rendered virtually helpless before cannon balls; no braahmana, no kshatriya could utilise one brahmastra even once against the enemies at any time.

Dear Shri Sangom,

Sorry for intruding in the conversation between you and Vivek. But saying that the ancient people were not able to foresee the future and not act accordingly despite their professed powers is like asking, Why God inspite of being omniscient and onmnipotent doesn't eradicate evil instantly? My belief is whatever happens , happens for a reason and the world with all its suffering, temptations, opportunities should be seen as a learning field with the only objective of whatever that does happen is for the elevation of the souls.

But perspectives can vary. For one who believes in only what he physically sees, this may not make a lot of sense. But you should think at least twice before being sarcastic about the ancients whose teachings formed the life philosophy of many wise people.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

Sorry for intruding in the conversation between you and Vivek. But saying that the ancient people were not able to foresee the future and not act accordingly despite their professed powers is like asking, Why God inspite of being omniscient and onmnipotent doesn't eradicate evil instantly? My belief is whatever happens , happens for a reason and the world with all its suffering, temptations, opportunities should be seen as a learning field with the only objective of whatever that does happen is for the elevation of the souls.

But perspectives can vary. For one who believes in only what he physically sees, this may not make a lot of sense. But you should think at least twice before being sarcastic about the ancients whose teachings formed the life philosophy of many wise people.

Dear Shri Sravna,

I do not agree with your pov for the following reasons:

1. The ancients we are speaking of are not God; nor were they as unknowable as the god-concept. They were ordinary mortals like you and me and all of them died eventually. Hence whatever you may want to attribute to God (I have a different perception which has been clarified to some extent in this post of mine.) cannot apply to our ancient mortal ancestors, IMO.

2. It is generally claimed that our ancients had welfare of the world in their mind; in support of this claim, slokas like "lokaah samastaah sukhinO bhavantu", "vasudhaiva kuTumbakam", "Om, SAntih SAntih SAntih" etc., are often quoted. If they were really so motivated, they should have used their special powers to ensure that their country and their people did not suffer from the foreign invasions, and, brahmins as the pre-eminent scientists (according to Shri Vivek's claim - I do not agree) ought to have done some defensive steps either in the materialistic way (what govts do today) or by their esoteric capacities, like making the border impenetrable with some very powerful mantra effects. Obviously they could not and/or did not do any of these things.

Hence my irreverence to the bombastic and exaggerated claims made about our ancients by some people; it is not against those people because they never seem to have claimed such privileges.

My irreverence as stated above has nothing to do with their making philosophies which, in turn, sustained an endless "hair-splitting", formation of sects within brahmins and so on; if at all, we should evaluate their philosophies also afresh, in terms of what benefits or harm such philosophies caused to the mindset of the populace.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom - Don't have a wrapped up image about Indian history

"The all-wise brahmins also did not manifest any wisdom to know what was happening across the border (just a large desert, no mountains, etc.,) either through their divine sight or by rustic wisdom. Finally, when the conquerors started ruling, the brahmins immediately took up the "high offices" forsaking their ordained swadharma claim. So much for the glorious past when "varna" by gunas was prevalent."

And the 8th century which you point to is itself quiet late. By early references to sciences I am speaking of the time of the Charaka Samhita or of Ayudveda etc. Today, we only have these as early references, but what we have not done is carry their mode of study and continued to practice it in order enrich our scientific abilities.

"Hence, I believe the time limit for "the failure of the society" to which you refer in the subsequent portion will have to be moved at least to A.D. 712!, and not when the british came in."

You hardly understood my post it seems Sangom. A part of North India, didn't engulp (geographically) all the places in India, or the places of Hindu tradition.

The prominance of certain southern dynasties like the Cholas came about after the 8th century, and brahmins were part of this civilization too. It is not me saying the scientific field was the occupation of some brahmins - its history which says this. The role of brahmins was thus, unlike you say, not confined to abracadabra. Only that these passed on easily because it only required a receital, while the scientific study required a method and actual discipline.

And that site exactly confirms what I said, our society was divided because of its diversity confirmed by "...and the Jats and Meds and other tribes were on the side of the invaders."

Even in the cases of Rajputana being invaded, they had oppositions with the Marathas. India is a country which allowed diversity to flourish, but this diversity became a factor for divisiveness which was the problem.

While in other places diversity was destroyed to establish a single society religion. Again, as in my previous post, I don't believe it requires us to do what other societies did - ie. force a culture destroying diversity, but instead place a broader banner under which all the diversity within India, falls as "Indian".

"If they were really so motivated, they should have used their special powers to ensure that their country and their people did not suffer from the foreign invasions, and, brahmins as the pre-eminent scientists (according to Shri Vivek's claim - I do not agree) ought to have done some defensive steps either in the materialistic way (what govts do today) or by their esoteric capacities, like making the border impenetrable with some very powerful mantra effects. Obviously they could not and/or did not do any of these things."

Yes, and by the time they did not it the varna system was slowly being based on birth from place to place. You said incorrectly that 9th and 10th century showed the greatest achievements, that is incorrect as any reading of scientific developments in India by Hindus would show.

You clearly have little idea of what the brahmin varna was about which probably tells why you have such a low opinion of being a brahmin yourself.

Being "scientists" was not the only job of brahmins, the very nature of how knowledge was considered and passed on was different in those times. And these invasion for that matter happened across the world and was a time when political power consolidation was becoming larger.

To explain: If you see the history of the time, almost all societies including those in N. Europe, Britain (invaded and converted by Romans), or Iran, Egypt, much of the "today's-Islamic world", was invaded at the time and this is precisely because the early polytheist societies were at disadvantage compared to societies that unified under religions like Islam or the Roman version of Christianity (which also came to act as political unifiers).

"Hence my irreverence to the bombastic and exaggerated claims made about our ancients by some people; it is not against those people because they never seem to have claimed such privileges."

And I made no bombastic claims. I am just plainly stating a fact that the role of brahmins was more than just abracadabra. It is basically impossible for a varna to have gained respect for just abracadabra. Clearly though, you have not read of the other roles brahmins were part of which is why you have such a negative opinion of them.

"My irreverence as stated above has nothing to do with their making philosophies which, in turn, sustained an endless "hair-splitting", formation of sects within brahmins and so on"

And the rise of various philosophies has got to do different opinions being given a chance and heard instead of being shunned through violence - and that is why many schools popped up. To have an air of free opinions is good IMO, but it does lead to a diversity, which over time will lead to small groups existing everywhere and if divided they are at a huge disadvantage against more politically unified groups. This is why diversity is okay, if we ourselves can define a broader banner under which we call ourselves "Indian" and feel it.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[sangom]

And I made no bombastic claims. I am just plainly stating a fact that the role of brahmins was more than just abracadabra. It is basically impossible for a varna to have gained respect for just abracadabra. Clearly though, you have not read of the other roles brahmins were part of which is why you have such a negative opinion of them.

Shri Vivek,

Can you elaborate on the "the role of brahmins was more than just abracadabra", for the information of readers?

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom,

You implied that our ancestors did not have the powers . What I said was even if they did, they wouldn't want to interfere in the natural course of things. It wouldn't make sense to have a physical world where supernatural powers are used to achieve one's objectives. At least not to gain any undue advantage. Lessons have to be learnt in the physical world and they need to be learnt the enduring way.

Also those people were pragmatic to the core, definitely more than many of our self proclaimed pragmatists . For example, they had the sense to let people do only what their minds vibe with. Thus whatever brahmin says would be abracadabra wrt a kshatriya's interests and whatever the kshatriya does would be abracadabra for a vaishya. They let natural inclinations align with what one does. Also it is my opinion in the field of medicine, their knowledge in the way they consider the holistic nature of the body reveals a deeper understanding of it and sadly ayurveda has fallen out of grace mainly due to the coming into predominance of the western systems and therefore allopathy.

The reason why I think science was not developed then is due to the very notion of spirituality. It is not that the brahmins were lesser in intelligence to their european counterparts but were intent and striving for higher knowledge. The fact that science is the main source of acquiring knowledge today doesn't imply that it the best source for knowledge.

The role each group of people played in the society would have offered the latitude for science to be a source of knowledge. But the important point that needs to be kept in mind is that whatever those people devised they tried to strike a balance and be in sync with the nature

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

You implied that our ancestors did not have the powers . What I said was even if they did, they wouldn't want to interfere in the natural course of things. It wouldn't make sense to have a physical world where supernatural powers are used to achieve one's objectives. At least not to gain any undue advantage. Lessons have to be learnt in the physical world and they need to be learnt the enduring way.

Dear Shri Sravna,

These do not seem to have been the motivating principle as depicted by many instances in our scriptures.

Also those people were pragmatic to the core, definitely more than many of our self proclaimed pragmatists . For example, they had the sense to let people do only what their minds vibe with.

Here you are forgetting the fact the upanayanam and gurukula siksha in vedas were compulsory for all dvijas. Hence learning the abracadabra was a must and nobody including the sudras were allowed the "latitude" to do only what their minds vibed with.

Thus whatever brahmin says would be abracadabra wrt a kshatriya's interests and whatever the kshatriya does would be abracadabra for a vaishya. They let natural inclinations align with what one does.

this is rendered meaningless in the light of my above observation.

Also it is my opinion in the field of medicine, their knowledge in the way they consider the holistic nature of the body reveals a deeper understanding of it and sadly ayurveda has fallen out of grace mainly due to the coming into predominance of the western systems and therefore allopathy.

Ayurveda is not a complete treatment system, nor is it holistic. But that is an entirely different topic. The very fact that ayurveda doctors, homeopaths, siddha practitioners all have now been allowed to prescribe allopathic drugs is telling proof of where the non-allopathic systems stand. Even today no ayurveda doctor, no homeopath, no siddha practitioner, will say that he has full and unshakable faith in his line and will be ready to die without trying allopathic hospitals before entering Yama's world!!

The reason why I think science was not developed then is due to the very notion of spirituality. It is not that the brahmins were lesser in intelligence to their european counterparts but were intent and striving for higher knowledge. The fact that science is the main source of acquiring knowledge today doesn't imply that it the best source for knowledge.

This is the abracadabra I refer to. The ancients were very good at hair-splitting all imaginary and கவைக்குதவாத விஷயங்கள். But when it came to the practical world and its realities, they were very very inadequate. Of course, post-Sankara the world itself became unreal and every one was after the elusive brahman, perhaps!

The role each group of people played in the society would have offered the latitude for science to be a source of knowledge. But the important point that needs to be kept in mind is that whatever those people devised they tried to strike a balance and be in sync with the nature

I do not know which period of hinduism you are referring to here. In the sacrificial age there were too many animals sacrificed, beef-eating was not prohibited and flesh is prescribed as a must for satiating the Manes. So, in what way the ancient people consciously devised to sync with nature? Will you kindly furnish half a dozen examples?

 

[siganeswarie]

Varna refers to the categorization of the Hindu by four castes, hypothesized by the Brahmins and their sacred texts. This quadruple division is not to be confused with Jati or even the much finer division of the contemporary caste http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varna_(Hinduism)#cite_note-0The four varnas, or chatur varna, are mentioned in ancient texts in the following (stratified) order, from top to bottom, [2]

• the Brahmins: Scholars, teachers and fire priests
• the Kshatriyas: Kings and soldiers warriors
• the Vaishyas: Agriculturists and merchants
• the Shudras: Service providers and artisans

They are also divided into two groups, the Arya (comprising the first three classes) and the Shudra (śudrārya),[3] the Shudra generally being excluded from Vedic rituals.
Separate and shunned by the society were the "untouchables" like the Candala (cāṇḍāla), who had to deal with the disposal of dead bodies and are described as dirty and polluted. There was a belief that one's Karma in the past, resulted in one's condition in this birth. "Now people here whose conduct is good can expect to quickly attain a pleasant birth, like that of a Brahmin, the Ksatriya, or the Vaisya. But people of evil conduct can expect to enter a foul womb, like that of a dog, a pig, or a Chandala" [4].
The varna system of Hindu society is described in the various Puranas and Smritis, among others. Manusmriti, is a Dharmashastra text reflecting the laws and society of Maurya period India and was a reference work for the Brahmins of Bengal.
The modern Hindu caste system recognizes many more social groupings not mentioned in the Hindu scriptures and only theoretically accepts the necessity of following prescribed duties. Caste politics is a controversial issue in the contemporary

 

[siganeswarie]

The Purusha Sukta in the Rig-Veda 10:90 refers to the four principal varnas, although the word varna is not used, described in Manu's code, viz. Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras. They are compared to the body of the "primordial man" or Purusha: "The Brâhmana was his mouth, of both his arms was the Râjanya made. His thighs became the Vaishya, his feet became the Sûdra" (RV 10.90.12) This model is often cited for its hierarchical ordering of the varnas, however, by the same logic the model also implies the concept of interdependence and interchangeability of the varnas. Furthermore reading this mantra within the entire context of the Purusha Sukta, which also describes the Purusha as the origin of the Sun (from his eye), the Moon (from his mind), the sky (from his head), air (from his navel), horses, cattle, etc. leads one to the conclusion that the entire Sukta is emphasizing the point that all these come from the original Purusha.
There is a story in the Chandogya Upanishad 4.4.1-5 of a boy, Satyakama by name, who wished to present himself before a guru for spiritual instruction but did not know his gotra or family lineage, which is ordinarily required before one can be initiated in the Vedic tradition. When asked of his gotra by his prospective guru, Satyakama truthfully told him that he did not know his gotra and that he was instructed to refer to himself simply as "Satyakama Jabala" or in other words, Satyakama son of Jabala (his mother). His guru was impressed with his honesty and concluded, despite not knowing the boy's gotra, that Satyakama was a brahmin and could thus receive initiation.[8] Some modern Hindu thinkers claim that this story downplays the importance of heredity in favor of qualification, as Satyakama was accepted as a brahmin despite there being no proof his hereditary brahminical status. However, traditional commentators such as Sri Sankaracharya uphold the view that the truth-telling was itself regarded by the guru as evidence of the boy's brahminical lineage, which, along with the fact that guru requested to know the boy's lineage, implies that heredity was a prerequisite for initiation as a brahmin.
In the Bhagavad-Gita 4:13, the Lord Krishna pointedly declares that not by birth/hereditary reasons, but that the class of an individual is based on each person's inherent nature and capability in doing work.[9]
Many Hindu yogis and sages have, over the centuries, constantly commented about inheriting social status. Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (15th century), the powerful bhakti of Krishna also denounced inheriting social status. He famously distributed the Hare Krishna mantra to all around India, claiming this was the True path to moksha.
Kanakadasa of the 15th century also denounced inherited social status. He believed that Life in every human being is Divine, and that only the ignorant wrought injustice against their own brethren by this practice. Basavanna of the 12th century is said to have denounced inherited social status and tried to unify all communities under the Linga (form of Shiva

 

[siganeswarie]

The concept of dharma deals mainly with the duties of the different varṇas and āśhramas (life cycles). Therefore most of the dharmaśāstras lay down the duties of people during the different parts of life and the duties of the different castes. The dharmaśāstras were written by Brahmins for Brahmins, therefore the greater part of them deals with the duties of the Brahmins. The part pertaining to the court system deals with the role of the Kṣatriya, in their role as the ruling class. However, the sections reserved for the Vaiśyas and the Śūdras are very short. In fact, in the Manuśmrti, the section marked for the Śūdras simply reads that they should do what they can to serve the Brahmins, and indicates that if they do well by the Brahmins they will be reborn into a higher caste. Though they are not allowed to recite the ritual formulas, they may do what they can to know and practice the Law through the imitation of Brahmins, as long as they do not do it out of envy.[10]
Manusmṛti is often quoted in reference to the Varna system as an inherited social class system. However, the Hindu rightists usually point out that the Manusmṛti is a later work that does not form a part of Hindu Scriptures, so it is of questionable relevance. The rightists content that the Manusmṛti has been used by British colonialists, politicians and sociologists to denigrate those of the Hindu faith.[11]
The Manusmṛti claims that by the time it was written in ancient times, Hindu society included another class (untouchables) of people without a position in any of the four Varnas and therefore associated with the lowest of the jobs. The upper classes, who were supposed to maintain ritual and corporal purity, came to regard them as untouchables. The people of this "fifth varna" are now called Dalits (the oppressed) or Harijans; they were formerly known as "untouchables" or "pariahs". However, this last addition social strata is not a part of the religion of Hinduism. Hinduism only categorizes occupations into four categorised

 

[siganeswarie]

The terms Varna (general classification based on occupation) and Jati (caste) are two distinct concepts. Varna (from Sanskrit, literally "arrangement") is usually a unification of all the Hindu castes or jatis into four groups: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra. It is sometimes also used to refer to this unification into one of several varna-sankaras वर्ण संकर. Jati (community) is an endogamous group. Generally a sub-community is divided into exogamous groups based on same gotras गोत्र. The classical authors scarcely speak of anything other than the varnas. Indologists sometimes confuse the two.[27]
Many of them Hindus could be classified into a specific varnation. But not all. During the British rule, several cases went to court to settle the "varna" of a sub-community[citation needed]. For example, the farmers are sometimes given Bramin status because many ruling Chieftains may have risen from them. On the other hand some classified them as Vaishya, based on an older occupation of artisans. Orthodox Brahmins may classify them as Shudras, because they do not have a tradition of undergoing through the thread ceremony, that would make them dvija (dvijya being a term referring to the four high varnas - Brahmin, Kashatriya and Vaishya - members of which are allowed to engage in the thread ceremony and thereby gain the right to education).

 

[siganeswarie]

The late Swami Krishnananda, a foremost disciple of Swami Sivananda and former General Secretary of Divine Life Society, noted the following about inherited social status in his autobiography:
"While the [varna] system was originally evolved for the necessary classification of human duty in order to preserve the organic stability of society, its original meaning and its philosophical foundation was forgotten through the passage of time, and bigotry and fanaticism took its place through the preponderance of egoism, greed and hatred, contrary to the practice of true religion as a social expression of inner spiritual aspiration for a gradual ascent, by stages, to God Almighty. Vidura, famous in the Mahabharata, was born of a Shudra woman. But he had the power to summon the son of Brahma, from Brahmaloka, by mere thought. Which orthodox Brahmin can achieve this astounding feat? It is, therefore, necessary for everyone to have consideration for the facts of world-unity and goodwill, Sarvabhuta-hita, as the great Lord mentions in the Bhagavad Gita. Justice is more than law. No one's body is by itself a Brahmin, because it is constituted of the five gross elements,- earth, water, fire, air and ether. Else, it would be a sin on the part of a son to consign to flames the lifeless body of a Brahmin father. It is, therefore, not proper to victimise a colleagu

 

[siganeswarie]

varna originated in a higher age, but became degraded through ignorance and self-interest. Yogananda said: "These were (originally) symbolic designations of the stages of spiritual refinement. They were not intended as social categories. And they were not intended to be hereditary. Things changed as the yugas [cycles of time] descended toward mental darkness. People in the higher [classes] wanted to make sure their children were accepted as members of their own [class]. Thus, ego-identification caused them to freeze the ancient classifications into what is called the ‘caste system.’ Such was not the original intention. In obvious fact, however, the offspring of a brahmin may be a shudra by nature. And a peasant, sometimes, is a real saint."—from Conversations with Yogananda, Crystal Clarity Publishers, 2003.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom

"Can you elaborate on the "the role of brahmins was more than just abracadabra", for the information of readers?"

edited and removed

"This is the abracadabra I refer to. The ancients were very good at hair-splitting all imaginary and கவைக்குதவாத விஷயங்கள். But when it came to the practical world and its realities, they were very very inadequate. Of course, post-Sankara the world itself became unreal and every one was after the elusive brahman, perhaps!"

Search of possible supernatural means to attain knowledge is not the only thing that was done. Brahmins had a system of study and education that established various real-life knowledge too. And if you recall my first posts here, this is exactly what I had asked - method. Today we have scattered ideas of what earlier people knew, we don't however carry their method of study because it was something that required actual discipline. The mantras (which is but one part) was of course carried further, because it was just recital.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Praveen,

You may find this as irritating, especially when you have already written about your frustrations with the way things go here.

But the above post by Shri Vivek is not at all in good taste, in my opinion. I asked him to elaborate because brahmins were permitted only certain functions according to the Dharmasastras. But instead of giving a civil reply he has gone off the track and is making personal remarks. I am just bringing this to your notice and would await your valued decision.

I am sending this as a pm to you also.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom

"I asked him to elaborate because brahmins were permitted only certain functions according to the Dharmasastras. But instead of giving a civil reply he has gone off the track and is making personal remarks. I am just bringing this to your notice and would await your valued decision."

I gave a very civil reply for the rhetoric you have used Sangom. The dharmashastras are not the alpha and omega of India, nor of the brahmin tradition and history. You are engaged in negative remarks of a community, when you clearly haven't read their role in society.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom,

Will you condemn IQ tests and entrance tests such as IIT's JEE, GRE, GMAT etc, just because they tend to select candidates based on intelligence? I hope not. Otherwise the one who practices allopathy too would be an agent to yama's world.

Just as these exams test your logical ability, the varna classification was based on one's quest or disposition to learnh higher knowledge. I do not see any ulterior motives behind such a classification. The reason ayurveda is not thriving today is that the best minds are now in the grip of western systems and it is not because allopathy is better.

If you take any system devised by the ancient people you would definitely see that the underlying theme is not to just see the parts in isolation but how the parts come together and make a whole.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

Will you condemn IQ tests and entrance tests such as IIT's JEE, GRE, GMAT etc, just because they tend to select candidates based on intelligence? I hope not. Otherwise the one who practices allopathy too would be an agent to yama's world.

Just as these exams test your logical ability, the varna classification was based on one's quest or disposition to learnh higher knowledge. I do not see any ulterior motives behind such a classification. The reason ayurveda is not thriving today is that the best minds are now in the grip of western systems and it is not because allopathy is better.

If you take any system devised by the ancient people you would definitely see that the underlying theme is not to just see the parts in isolation but how the parts come together and make a whole.

Dear Shri Sravna,

I sincerely feel that you have perhaps not understood my post; may be it is the shortcoming on my part. What I wanted to emphasize was that allopathy stands out, even today, as the medical system par excellence and even the doctors practising the other systems rush to an allopathic hospital/doctor the moment they have a chest pain. I did not say that allopathic doctors are immortal.

I also did not say anything relating to the varna or selection by aptitude in the above post - only that even the ayurveda developed by our ancients is deficient and is not as good as allopathy. Let me hasten to add that allopathy is also not perfect but it stands head and shoulders above all the other systems.

As to whether ayurveda has a "holistic" approach or not, it is itself a different topic and I am not going into it now.

Hope my pov is clear enough now.