Dear Sir,
Am glad that a term called "Scheduled Caste" or "Scheduled Tribe" exists without any dharmashastra connotation attached to the term. Am speaking of shastras that label, characterize and represent certain population sections, as people who are good for nothing apart from serving dvijas.
Okay, it is fine if it works for you. It does not for me, because, again, these folks are labeled.
So before we speak of the term called "Scheduled" caste / tribe we need to ask ourselves
1) why such terms as a 'sudra' servant / 'dasa' slave exist in the shastras?
2) are we comfortable with such terms in the present times?,
3) in what manner are such 'divine' labour-laws applicable in the present times?
4) what steps have been taken so far by the orthodoxy of the vedic religion
4.a) to assess social structures under a secular democracy
4.b) to evaluate the relevance of the shastras in the current social conditions
4.c) to redress the position (and terminology usage) of shudras in the current hindu social conditions and under a democratic rule.
Dear sister, what is past is past. In terms of the social relevance, the old caste system died on the day a law was passed outlawing it. I am only talking about today.
The orthodoxy had a golden chance to work upon all this at the dawn of indian independence or even under a colonial government. But they did not. Instead the orthodoxy chose to "exclusify" itself. It took no steps to address the position and usage of the term 'Shudra'.
I have no concern about the so called 'orthodoxy'. Their relevance is less and less with each passing day.
If the orthodoxy used / uses the term Shudra, then quite apparently the government has to use some term to denote a marginalized section. And, if the government listed such marginalized sections in a Schedule, and called them "Scheduled" caste/tribe, so be it. Atleast the term SC/ST has no religious connotations and does not brand or remind a margnilized section about their position in a "hindu" society.
Again, to me this does not make sense. I thought the government has outlawed catstes and they have every power to enforce it. So, why should they continue a terminology just because some in the society can not give up the past?
I should beleive that with education and upward mobility, 'class' differences should vanish. But ofcourse casteists, esp the vanguards of orthodoxy, have a way of constantly reminding others about their castes. So, as long as the orthodoxy does not address ground-realities, casteism in the social sphere will remain. And as long as casteism in the social arena remains, then the government will have to continue caste-based reservations.
No sister - on the contrary, the government has every duty to squash casteism, because its is against the law. The problem is the government itself is casteist in general and looks like otherwise only when it comes to garnering votes.
When i speak of the social arena, i would like to point out a simple example from the blog -- that is, on the way Suchindranath Aiyer attributed some 'human' qualities and characteristics (hard-work, integrity and diligence) as "brahmanical" characteristics. I do not understand what is the necessity to dub such qualities as "brahmanical" qualities?
I don't know about his motives. To me, based on our culture and history, 'brahmin' means all the good qualities in a human being that represent the highest ideals. Swami Vivekananda expressed this idea quite well. To me it has nothing to do with one's birth in to a caste. It is everything to do with one's character and ideals as a human being. 'Brahmin' is not a bad word for me. This is why, I once called you a Brahmin and I still consider you as one. What is wrong with that?
You know sir, its like saying indirectly "I am born a brahmin, I have the nice quality of integrity". I suppose that's the sort of attitude that puts off most people. Because in effect, its like saying that shudras do not have the qualities of hard-work, integrity and diligence. Its like conveying that a brahmin is noble but a shudra is ignoble.
I do not think of this like that at all. Nobility by birth does not enter here. As you know, I totally rject birth based caste system. I only adhere to the varnas for reference - nothing more.
But ofcourse, when faced with 'direct' questions a typical obfuscation wud be that "caste is not by birth", yet the shastras have most cetainly designated caste by birth. So the next time i see someone saying caste is not by birth, am going to ask him/her "what makes you a brahmin then?" or "what makes you a vellalar then?".
I am against casteism, so I don't know how to answer this. I was born in to a 'Brahmin' family. I identify myself with the culture of my family. Other than that, to me the notion that I am any better than anyone in this world as a human being does not even arise.
Anyone reading this, including Shri Suchindranath Aiyer, please evaluate yourself and ask yourself what makes you a brahmin? If any of you thinks hard-work, integrity and diligence are "brahmanical", then would you accept anyone (irrespective of caste) as "brahmanical"?
Yes, I certainly would.
Sir, i do not hate caste for TODAY's conditions, because i feel as occupation categories change, caste will eventually change. I feel those who were formely marginalized feel blessed for TODAY's conditions. We are in the 'chaos' period where the terms of social renaissance are unacceptable to some. Added to it the pace of social renaissance is slow with several blocks along the way. But eventually time, i feel, will settle things.
I only said 'Today's conditions', in terms of the rapid changes happening in today's society vis-a-vis our past
The idea of a 'free' nation, cannot arise, if from the religious pov some sections continue to be marginalised. I feel one cannot expect 'equal treatment' from the government unless a religion starts treating everyone as equal socially. If we were a 'free' nation truly, then all indivuals would have the same birth right to study anything (including the vedas), and to pursue any occupation as one chooses.
Sorry sister, I beg to disagree. The reason India formed a secular government was to have an Indian society, not a Hindu society, or a Muslim society, etc. Religion, by the definition of a secular government, should not dictate it's functioning. Matham can say whatever they want - but if the government passes a law where none is prohibited from learning Vedas, guess what? - thatwill be the new Dharma shastra.
No one sets cultural limitations themselves, because i beleive the mind by nature is designed to explore. Quite apparently 'limitations' were imposed upon marginalised sections for centuries. Getting out of such 'limitations' will take time. Sometimes i do not understand on what basis can the past-beneficieries crib about benefits given to the marginalised ones now (in case they are doing so).
I am sorry - but because these communities were marginalized from partaking in the society, they have no concept of value of education, let alone the higher aspects of life, like literature and arts. This is the limitation set on them by others and they need to be freed from that.
I suppose once the playing field has been levelled, we will eventually get to meritocracy. But there are some systems in the country that have always run on meritocracy i suppose, such as post-graduate admissions for medical specialities.
Meritocracy can not function with only a few segments of the society partaking. True meritocracy means to have EVERYONE in the society being given the opportunity and preparation to compete equally on a level field.By not giving both to our disadvantaged brethren, we are cheating the nation and ourselves in getting the best.
Sir i disagree with this. The SC/ST section constitutes around 30% of the population i think (please correct me if am wrong in this). The forward castes constitute around 10% or so. The vast bulk majority are the BCs. I certinaly feel the BCs have prospered well due to reservations. So much that they do not need reservations anymore.
I am concerned only with SC/ST progress. Please read the research article that Professor Nara Ji posted above (which I originally posted) to understand the effect of the quota system in their lives.
Dr, Sowell is an acclaimed social thinker in the U.S. He has looked at the successes of affirmative actions around the globe (in India, it is actually called 'positive discrimination') and I am giving you two references - one an overview and two his book excerpt. Please read the latter carefully:
Affirmative Action around the World | Hoover Institution
Affirmative Action Around the World ... - Google Books
Please also read this, especially Sam Pitroda's comments:
Evaluating Tamil Nadu's 69% quota - Rediff.com India News
What's more, today even dalits are able to qualify on merit to professional colleges. A servent-maid's son who used to live in a hut across my house is now a teaching faculty. Such transformations amaze me.
My argument is not that the quota system has not delivered ANY benefits to the targeted community - but rather that it's effect is minimal anf has not delivered the benefits commensurate with it's cost. I think other members here are portraying as though I have said that it did not deliver ANY benefits.
Ofcourse reservation benefits continue to be cornered by the richer ones amongst every group. Hence recovery is slow. But recovery is happening. And happening very well. So perhaps we just have to contend with the situation. The sense of caste and hierarchy is far too deep-rooted in the indian social ethos to expect dynamic changes all across the hierachical gradient suddenly.
But, this is my point. Why should we put up with a system that is delivering so slow, when we know that we can do other things to change this?
Me too reject such conclusions.
Sir i feel reservations have benefitted the unprivileged in many more ways that i cud have dreamt of.
As far as the designation of "forward caste" or "backward caste" goes, i feel such designations should be wiped out and all children irrespective of their "former-caste" should be given the option to study anything they wish. Am all for a uniform law code applicable to all indians
This is exactly I am asking from our secular government..
Would cultural transformation also include betterment of social image from the religious pov?? If not, then of what use would some training or mentorship programme be, if a child grows to be an achiever, and yet suffers social prejudice because of caste?
Because with proper coaching, that child will overcome such prejudices, like Sri Ambedkar. It will relegate those prejudiced against accomplished persons as the 'red necks' of India.
I remember having read in the WEEK magazine about rich dalits who change their surname to avoid prejudice. But i suppose now the dalits have had enough of running away from their surnames and old-identities. They want to assert themselves "along with" their caste. So they even have a 'Dalit Chamber of Commerce'. I feel their progress is a fitting reply to all those who brand them as "incapable" people.
Yes, but we need to accelerate this - by the way as a part of our society, not as estranged from it.
Practicing untouchability, adopting vegetarianism and imitating the practices and ways of brahmins are all part of the "sanskritisation" process. Its the "caste-demon" at work. I would blame the shastras for such attitudes. But i suppose it will take time for such casteist attitudes to drop off...esp since people have better things to pursue in the current rapidly changing world that is getting more and more industrialized and modernised.
Yes. But more importantly we need to really educate
Sir, methinks the dalits feel reservations have benefitted them. I have not met a single dalit in person or on any online forum who thinks reservations did not benefit their lot. Are there statistics to prove dalits have not benefitted from reservations, or those who feel reservations have not helped them? Based on my interaction, on a personal note, i can say that some of them are resentful that despite their upward mobility they are still bracketed by the 'hindu' society based on caste. So their angst is with the caste-system of the 'hindu dharma', not with the reservation-system.
I have come across a couple of articles (one by an IIT professor), who are dalits, who do not like the quota system. I will search for them and post.
Am adding a few links on actual success stories of dalits who have benefitted from the reservations-system:
1)
business.outlookindia.com | Bite The Caste Bullet
2) This one is the best --
www.outlookindia.com | Manu Who?
3)
Caste no bar - Times Of India
Regards.
. Tabras have been more successful in such alienation than brahmans in the rest of the country generally, IMO, thanks more to the Moghul rule which lasted sufficiently long in most other regions, to show the Brahmans their weaknesses, including the uselessness of their mantras and yajnas against cavalry and spearmen.
maybe then it will be an opportunity for tambrams to pick up lucrative skilled trades like designer jewellery, clothing and art
