Dr. B.R. Ambedkar

[RVR]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

EVR cannot be compared to BRA. EVR only contributed a lot of negative emotion bordering on hatred to Brahmins. That is all. Till the end by when the DMK had come to power he could not bring himself to allowing Brahmins to join his DK party. I don't know in which other 'democracy' a party is allowed to refuse membership to certain people on the basis of caste! On the other hand we can disagree with the percentage contribution of BRA to our constitution, but it is substantial. And his stated goal was caste fraternity and equality. If success is only going to be measured by gaining power then let us not forget that EVR had substantial backing from the BC in Tamilnadu who account for more than half the population. The dalits are less than 20% which is why they are at the receiving end from the BC even today. Unfortunately they have been constantly encouraged to hate the FC as their enemies. Should they begin to see the hardships of the FC today they would join them. And a population of 35% has a better chance of success.

If you impartially study EVR's life history, he started his career as a freedom fighter in the Congress party.

He felt that Brahmins are discriminating other communities and hence started the self respect movement.

He never went after elections or aspired for any post but spearheaded his campaign as a pure social movement. Even today DK is not a recognised political party.

He definitely succeeded in driving Brahmins out of Government both politically and administratively.

It is another story that daliths were left out. But the main objective of DK was achieved and Tamilnadu politics is no more Brahmin centric.

Today the offshoots of DK is controlled by Cinema and Liquor lobbies irrespective of castes.

CNA, Karunanidhi, MGR, JJ are all film personalities with strong link to liquor lobby.

We cannot talk the same thing about BRA. Why he converted in to Buddhism. Has he achieved social equality by embarrassing Buddhism. Still daliths are discriminated throughout the country and BRA movement has not achieved anything.

All the best

 

[nachi naga]

when b.r.ambedkar is abbreviated as ' bra ' i am reminded of women,in lighter vein

 

[kunjuppu]

i agree with RVR, that periyar's conversion to brahmin hating atheism was gradual.

it was on seeing the secondary status given to non brahmins in the then erstwhile congress. the last nail in the coffin was ofcourse, the humiliation he suffered in varanasi, when attempting to perform last rites for his parents, and was rudely rebuffed by the brahmins there.

should we doubt this, we can after nearly a century of the event, see those types of attitudes pretty strong within our community, though we might not want to publish it here.

why i am saying this, is that when it comes to caste, i think, it is in our blood. how else, can we excuse ourselves, that in the swayamvarams, we seek so many filter, for what is a toss up relationship.

do we have the future in mind? or are we scared on scarring the past? i do not know. but i do that there are folks like me, who do their protest against such racism by simply walking out.

we do not advertise our disgust. we just walk away and do our own thing. in another thread, our own praveen has admitted that his two sisters had married non brahmins. it should be a non issue, but i see the sisters asserting themselves (glory be to them) to seek out a life with men of their fondness, irrespective of the consequences to their community.

i think, this phenomena, is no longer in the fringes of our community, but close to, if not mainstream thinking. who planted the roots of this thought? periyar.

every community, including the dalits of tamil nadu, pay obeisance to periyar. such an overhwhelming acknowledgement is hard to find anywhere in the world in any community.

granted periyar was not perfect. if at all, he himself acknowledged it, and advised his followers, not to follow his teaching blindly, but only pick and choose what was relevant to them, and to the changing times.

like any revolution, periyarist revolution, ended by consuming its own children, and within two generation, ended up in the corruption managed by JJ & MK.

personally, what is happening to western christianity is the same. the fallout rate is almost complete with the whites. what props them up in the u.s. is the latinos and filipinos.

i am confident that this will not happen to our hindu temples in india. for the torch has been taken away (not passed) from the brahmins to the other groups. it might be remembered that it was the non brahmins who built the greatest edifices of saivism and vaishnavism in tamil nadu.

for a brief moment, the firefly 'tamil brahmin' shone in the imagined darkness, trying to grab the glory of power. the dawn came, and with the advent of the உதய சூரியன் , so expired the firefly.

சுபம்.

ps. in the history of comparative religions, i personally, do not know of any other group, which dividied and subdivided itself to an imagined level of 'purity', and eagerly pushed out its own members into willing arms of other faiths, and in the ultimate, committed a harikari to its own demise, as brahministic version of hinduism.

 

[Iyest]

If you impartially study EVR's life history, he started his career as a freedom fighter in the Congress party.

He never went after elections or aspired for any post but spearheaded his campaign as a pure social movement. Even today DK is not a recognised political party.

You are technically correct that DK is not a political party. That does not mean anything since they clearly support candidates in elections and influence political parties. The fact is that there exists an organization even today that does not admit brahmins based on caste.

He definitely succeeded in driving Brahmins out of Government both politically and administratively.

You are wrong here. If we consider him to be non political, his party could not be credited for administrative decisions. Rajaji was a Brahmin CM but then he got this job when he quit as Governor General. The Congress party had already instituted reservation under Kamaraj and Bhaktavatsalam, who were both not brahmins. So the Congress had already started the process of reducing brahmins a decade before the DMK captured power in 1967. Even today, the Congress has minimal brahmin representation in TN.

It is another story that daliths were left out.

That is the issue. EVR even while preaching anti brahminism never did anything substantial for the dalits.

But the main objective of DK was achieved and Tamilnadu politics is no more Brahmin centric.

As mentioned above, it had already moved in that direction with Kamaraj and Bhaktavatsalam.

Has he achieved social equality by embarrassing Buddhism. Still daliths are discriminated throughout the country and BRA movement has not achieved anything.

Again, if EVR for all his bravado could not bring himself to achieving substantial dalit representation even at the state level, how could BRA achieve that with less than 20% of the population at the national level? To his credit, he contributed through the Constitution. The real failure was that of EVR. He could have insisted that the DMK take definite steps for dalit progress. He could have insisted on a certain number of dalit cabinet posts from the DMK in 1967 in return for his support. At the very least he could have influenced the turn of events after the death of Annadurai when the DMK was weak and divided into groups. By not doing anything, EVR clearly showed that he was happy with the BC centric society in TN. It still continues that way today. The dalits who were left out then, have yet to gain a foothold and continue to be at the receiving end of atrocities mainly from the BC.

 

[RVR]

You are technically correct that DK is not a political party. That does not mean anything since they clearly support candidates in elections and influence political parties. The fact is that there exists an organization even today that does not admit brahmins based on caste.



You are wrong here. If we consider him to be non political, his party could not be credited for administrative decisions. Rajaji was a Brahmin CM but then he got this job when he quit as Governor General. The Congress party had already instituted reservation under Kamaraj and Bhaktavatsalam, who were both not brahmins. So the Congress had already started the process of reducing brahmins a decade before the DMK captured power in 1967. Even today, the Congress has minimal brahmin representation in TN.




That is the issue. EVR even while preaching anti brahminism never did anything substantial for the dalits.



As mentioned above, it had already moved in that direction with Kamaraj and Bhaktavatsalam.



Again, if EVR for all his bravado could not bring himself to achieving substantial dalit representation even at the state level, how could BRA achieve that with less than 20% of the population at the national level? To his credit, he contributed through the Constitution. The real failure was that of EVR. He could have insisted that the DMK take definite steps for dalit progress. He could have insisted on a certain number of dalit cabinet posts from the DMK in 1967 in return for his support. At the very least he could have influenced the turn of events after the death of Annadurai when the DMK was weak and divided into groups. By not doing anything, EVR clearly showed that he was happy with the BC centric society in TN. It still continues that way today. The dalits who were left out then, have yet to gain a foothold and continue to be at the receiving end of atrocities mainly from the BC.

EVR was not bothered who was in power. He has supported both congress and DMK to achieve his goals. His main intention was removing the brahmin domination both politically and administratively which he achieved in his life.

Kamaraj was the first give reservation to BCs. Rajaji bungled in the Kula Kalvi scheme and Congress was forced to remove him from power to win over non-brahmin community votes.

DMK under Karunanidhi improved the reservation to 49% and AIADMK under MGR further improved it to 69%.

But the seeds for anti-brahminism was sown by EVR which flourished even after his demise.

EVR's main focus was Anti-Brahminism and he never attempted to promote any caste among Non-Brahmin community (dalith included).

As I said earlier, Cinema lobby hijacked his movement starting with CNA.

CNA wrote story and dialogue for movies. MK produced films. Through Cinema, a malayali origin actor MGR hijacked one section of the movement. Ultimately JJ, a brahmin actress is heading this section of the movement.

But the under current of anti brahminism is practiced by all these factions and the victory belongs to EVR only.

EVR never supported any particular non-brahmin caste and hence he never attempted to project himself as champion of daliths.

But BRA projected himself as champion of daliths but still majority of the daliths are living in miserable conditions. Hence BRA movement has miserably failed.

All the best

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Anti Brahminism

EVR was not bothered who was in power. He has supported both congress and DMK to achieve his goals. His main intention was removing the brahmin domination both politically and administratively which he achieved in his life.

Kamaraj was the first give reservation to BCs. Rajaji bungled in the Kula Kalvi scheme and Congress was forced to remove him from power to win over non-brahmin community votes.

DMK under Karunanidhi improved the reservation to 49% and AIADMK under MGR further improved it to 69%.

But the seeds for anti-brahminism was sown by EVR which flourished even after his demise.

EVR's main focus was Anti-Brahminism and he never attempted to promote any caste among Non-Brahmin community (dalith included).

As I said earlier, Cinema lobby hijacked his movement starting with CNA.

CNA wrote story and dialogue for movies. MK produced films. Through Cinema, a malayali origin actor MGR hijacked one section of the movement. Ultimately JJ, a brahmin actress is heading this section of the movement.

But the under current of anti brahminism is practiced by all these factions and the victory belongs to EVR only.

EVR never supported any particular non-brahmin caste and hence he never attempted to project himself as champion of daliths.

But BRA projected himself as champion of daliths but still majority of the daliths are living in miserable conditions. Hence BRA movement has miserably failed.

All the best

You are absolutely right about EVR and BRA. But whatever be the conditions of the dalits, the programme has skylifted the lots of the people under DK, DMK. ADMK and all other MKs. Only the condition of and in Tamilnadu has not improved. So much for the munnetram!

 

[Nara]

Hello folks:

EVR with BRA operated at different planes. Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. The fact that the upper caste foot is still crushing Dalit throats is an indication of the ruthlessness of the upper caste, not a mark of miserable failure of BRA. If it is, then Gandhi can be characterized as an utter failure for not achieving a united India that he wanted so badly.

The reality is much more nuanced and a dispassionate study is required to fully understand their complex personalities, what motivated them, and in what way they impacted the society we live in. In this respect, both BRA and EVR are much more successful than anyone in the recent history of India.

EVR operated within the Dravidian sphere. Defining his goal as just eradication of Brahmins from corridors of power and influence is not fully appreciating what he wanted to do. He wanted to completely reorient the society, he wanted to drag the Tamil society into modernity kicking and screaming. Removing the spiritual influence of Brahmins upon the rest of the society was part of that agenda.

EVR's agenda went far beyond anti-brahminism, he was against blind pride in hoary Tamil greatness. He wanted to emancipate women, he wanted to free the society from superstitions, he wanted people to reject god from their lives. In all of these, the Tamil society treated him like a cranky old uncle -- just ignored him. Ironically, even in this narrow context of anti-Brahminism, how much support he would have received from the Justice Party NBs, had he been a Dalit himself like BRA, is open to speculation. Today, TN is one of the worst places to live for Dalits.

EVR's success is limited to marginalizing Brahmin influence, and for that there are many reasons not the least of which is the Brahmin arrogance itself. The entire NB upper castes were behind EVR in opposing the TBs. The Justice party was an exclusively upper caste NB entity with significant political and economic power. The nexus between these upper caste NB and EVR resulted in the marginalization of Brahmins, but did not go beyond that.

BRA played in an all-India plane. He was Dalit himself, so the odds against him were formidable. The task for him was not just turning the majority NB against a soft target like the self-aggrandized Brahmin minority in Tamil Nadu. His task was to free the Dalit minority from the oppression of the overwhelming and powerful caste Hindu majority. So, compared to EVR, BRA's task was infinitely more arduous, metric for success unimaginably tough and his base of support had no power of any kind. Given this, what BRA was able to achieve is, to put it mildly, impressive. Today, he is a symbol not just for Dalits all over India, but all the progressives everywhere. He is a reminder to all Dalits what they can achieve if opportunities are made available. He is a symbol of their own self respect. The statues of BRA they erect stands for their own self-respect. The upper castes deface these statutes to break their self-respect, show them their place and tell them who is the boss. In this respect BRA awakenned the inner spirit of Dalits all over India, what can be considered more successful than this?

Not just that, BRA's powerful intellectual rhetoric makes converts of non-Dalits every day. His impact is felt across all the social levels. I myself am an example of this. He is able find resonance with many a Brahmin many years after he is dead and gone. If this is miserable failure, we ought to have lot more miserable failures!!

Both EVR and BRA will standout in the history of India as great men who fought for the least among us. Both were successful to the extent they will continue to make people from all cross sections think. Both were failures to the extent their vision of a just and free society where people live with mutual self-respect free of gender and caste discrimination still remains a pipe dream. But for this, they are not responsible, we are.

Cheers!

 

[kunjuppu]

.... Only the condition of and in Tamilnadu has not improved. So much for the munnetram!

iyya,

i am not so sure about that.

TN ranks among the top industrialized states of india, back in the race under the JJ/MK rule after a gap when Kamaraj left. the broad range of industrialization has produced world class auto as well as software industries.

TN is never #1 but among the top 3 in many many sectors. one has only to cross the border to see the difference. cross the vindhyas and it is another story.

alcohol consumption is an historical fact of india and of the tamils. the temperence movement originated with gandhi and probably died a slow lingering death since gandhi.

however, i did like the service and hours during private shops. now with tasmac, it sucks, in presentation and environment. there are better ways to sell liquor than from godowns.

 

[Iyest]

EVR was not bothered who was in power. He has supported both congress and DMK to achieve his goals. His main intention was removing the brahmin domination both politically and administratively which he achieved in his life.

EVRs work in removing brahmins was made easy by those before and after him as your own examples show. The point here is what did EVR achieve for the dalits? And how does he compare with BRA?

EVR's main focus was Anti-Brahminism and he never attempted to promote any caste among Non-Brahmin community (dalith included).

By supporting and accepting the caste policies of the DMK, he was in agreement with the promotion of BC. Remember that though reservation has increased, the percentage for the dalits has remained the same.

But the under current of anti brahminism is practiced by all these factions and the victory belongs to EVR only.

Removing 3% of the population from power with the backing of nearly 60% is not much of a victory, especially when he had all the leaders from all parties in TN (except for Rajaji) in basic agreement on this issue. This can be seen from the fact that brahmins have been removed from ALL the states in India even without an EVR in any of them. That is not much of an achievement when the population distribution is so heavily one sided.

But BRA projected himself as champion of daliths but still majority of the daliths are living in miserable conditions. Hence BRA movement has miserably failed.

Lifting a mountain is a different task than breaking a molehill and there is no comparison. Look at it this way. BRA has affected ALL indians by his contributions to the constitution. He took on the majority views and practises for the welfare of the 20% who were suffering immensely all over the country. And the conditions of Dalits has improved enormously in all respects when compared to 1947 when they were not allowed to even walk on the same road for fear their shadow might fall on others. On the other hand, EVR is known little outside TN.

 

[Nara]

In annihilation of caste BRA systematically builds his case. The first argument he addressed was the theory that caste was simply a division labor. Next, he takes up the argument that the system, through endogamy, produces racial purity and finely honed skills through improving genetic qualities of each caste, aka eugenics.

BRA says it is a gross perversion of facts to hold that the object of Caste was to preserve purity of race and purity of blood. To establish this, he asks a series of rhetorical questions:

• "What racial affinity is there between the Brahmin of the Punjab and the Brahmin of Madras?"
• "What racial affinity is there between the untouchable of Bengal and the untouchable of Madras?"
• "What racial difference is there between the Brahmin of the Punjab and the Chamar of the Punjab?"
• "What racial difference is there between the Brahmin of Madras and the Pariah of Madras?"
• "The Brahmin of the Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of the Punjab, and the Brahmin of Madras is of the same race as the Pariah of Madras"

Even if caste is a form of social division, BRA goes on to ask,

"What harm could there be if a mixture of races and of blood was permitted to take place in India by intermarriages between different castes?"
​

On eugenics, BRA starts out with, “An immense lot of nonsense is talked about heredity and eugenics in defence of the Caste System.”

Then, even if the idea of eugenics is accepted, BRA asks,

• "[The] Caste System is a negative thing. It merely prohibits persons belonging to different castes from intermarrying. It is not a positive method of selecting which two among a given caste should marry. “
• “If Caste is eugenic in origin, then the origin of sub-castes must also be eugenic. But can anyone seriously maintain that the origin of sub-castes is eugenic?”
• "But what is the purpose of the interdict placed on interdining between castes and sub-castes alike? Interdining cannot infect blood, and therefore cannot be the cause either of the improvement or of [the] deterioration of the race. “

Then, BRA concludes,

"This shows that Caste has no scientific origin, and that those who are attempting to give it an eugenic basis are trying to support by science what is grossly unscientific."

"To argue that the Caste System was eugenic in its conception is to attribute to the forefathers of present-day Hindus a knowledge of heredity which even the modern scientists do not possess. "

"If Caste is eugenic, what sort of a race of men should it have produced? Physically speaking the Hindus are a C3 people. They are a race of Pygmies and dwarfs, stunted in stature and wanting in stamina. It is a nation 9/10ths of which is declared to be unfit for military service. This shows that the Caste System does not embody the eugenics of modern scientists. "

"It is a social system which embodies the arrogance and selfishness of a perverse section of the Hindus who were superior enough in social status to set it in fashion, and who had the authority to force it on their inferiors."​

 

[kunjuppu]

"what racial affinity is there between the brahmin of the punjab and the brahmin of madras?"

• "what racial affinity is there between the untouchable of bengal and the untouchable of madras?"
• "what racial difference is there between the brahmin of the punjab and the chamar of the punjab?"
• "what racial difference is there between the brahmin of madras and the pariah of madras?"
• "the brahmin of the punjab is racially of the same stock as the chamar of the punjab, and the brahmin of madras is of the same race as the pariah of madras"

என்ன சிங்க கர்ஜனை !!! உடம்பு சிலிர்க்கிறது

 

[Iyest]

Hello folks:

EVR with BRA operated at different planes. Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. The fact that the upper caste foot is still crushing Dalit throats is an indication of the ruthlessness of the upper caste, not a mark of miserable failure of BRA. !

He he! It is the failure of the Dalits to understand who is crushing their throats that is responsible for the failure of BRA. Another 1000 years of blaming the brahmins is guaranteed to keep their throats under the foot of the BC.

In this respect, both BRA and EVR are much more successful than anyone in the recent history of India.

Another gem! If this is the education that the dalits are being taught, then even 100% reservation is not going to help them.

!

Today, TN is one of the worst places to live for Dalits. !

Due to EVR, one of the most successful in the recent histroy of India according to you!

EVR's success is limited to marginalizing Brahmin influence, and for that there are many reasons not the least of which is the Brahmin arrogance itself. !

The only reason is the fact that Brahmins were about 3% of the population.

Both EVR and BRA will standout in the history of India as great men who fought for the least among us. !

EVR will be remembered because he fought to marry Maniammai in his old age, nothing more! He has ensured that Dalits are suppressed in TN for the foreseeable future.

 

[Nara]

Caste prevents Hindu nation

Hello folks,

Next, BRA states that Caste prevents Hindus from forming a real society or nation. Our political landscape today makes this painfully obvious.

Here is how BRA makes his case:

• "Hindu Society as such does not exist. It is only a collection of castes. Each caste is conscious of its existence. Its survival is the be-all and end-all of its existence."
• "Castes do not even form a federation. A caste has no feeling that it is affiliated to other castes, except when there is a Hindu-Muslim riot. On all other occasions each caste endeavours to segregate itself and to distinguish itself from other castes"
• "There is an utter lack among the Hindus of what the sociologists call "consciousness of kind." There is no Hindu consciousness of kind. In every Hindu the consciousness that exists is the consciousness of his caste. That is the reason why the Hindus cannot be said to form a society or a nation."

What he wrote in 1937 is so true even today. The plethora of caste based political parties, associations, groups, etc. is a sad reality even in this day and age.

Next, BRA takes up the apparent similarities between castes and argues why that is not what cogent society makes.

First he states the claim:

"… many Indians …. have insisted that underlying the apparent diversity there is a fundamental unity which marks the life of the Hindus, inasmuch as there is a similarity of those habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts …"
​

Then he shows why this claim is untenable.

• "Men do not become a society by living in physical proximity, any more than a man ceases to be a member of his society by living so many miles away from other men."
• Secondly, similarity in habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts, is not enough to constitute men into society. […] habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts of one group may be taken over by another group, and there may thus appear a similarity between the two. "
• "Culture spreads by diffusion, and that is why one finds similarity between various primitive tribes in the matter of their habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts, although they do not live in proximity."
• "But no one could say that because there was this similarity, the primitive tribes constituted one society. This is because similarity in certain things is not enough to constitute a society."
• " … Parallel activity, even if similar, is not sufficient to bind men into a society. "
• … parallel performances of similar festivals by the different castes have not bound them into one integral whole.

Then he defines what makes a society:

• "Men constitute a society because they have things which they possess in common."
• "For that purpose what is necessary is for a man to share and participate in a common activity, so that the same emotions are aroused in him that animate the others."
• "Making the individual a sharer or partner in the associated activity, so that he feels its success as his success, its failure as his failure, is the real thing that binds men and makes a society of them."

Thus he concludes,

"The Caste System prevents common activity; and by preventing common activity, it has prevented the Hindus from becoming a society with a unified life and a consciousness of its own being."
​

Cheers!

 

[nachi naga]

bra tried to say this,imo,but failed.

From the narrow vision of the individual need,one must voyage out into the broad vision of the Universal.When a drop of water falls into the ocean,it loses its narrow individualities,its name and form and assumes the form,name and taste of the ocean itself.If it seeks to live seperately as a drop,it will soon evaporate and be reduced to non-existance.Each one must become aware that he/she is part of the One Truth that encompasses everything in the Universe.Make the heart big and the mind pure,only then can peace and prosperity be established on earth.-Sai Baba.

 

[Nara]

Caste and anti-social spirit

Hi folks, as I continue excerpting BRA's case for annihilation of caste, let me paraphrase something I heard last night watching a TiVoed interview of Tyson DeGrasse by Steven Cobert. Pointing to the inquisitive nature of humans, Tyson said humans came out of caves a long time ago and have been discovering amazing things ever since -- but not everyone has come out of the caves.

Indeed, I thought, people have come out of the caste cave a long time ago and have been experiencing life to its full, but many still refuse to come out of this cave, and want to keep others from leaving as well.

Alright, back to BRA. In the next section BRA says the worst feature of caste system is it promotes anti-social spirit. Here is how he makes this case. (I have paraphrased some of what follows for brevity)

• The Sahyadrikhand[1] is a notorious instance of this class of literature.
• In my province the Golak Brahmins, Deorukha Brahmins, Karada Brahmins, Palshe Brahmins, and Chitpavan Brahmins all claim to be sub-divisions of the Brahmin caste. But the anti-social spirit that prevails between them is quite as marked and quite as virulent as the anti-social spirit that prevails between them and other non-Brahmin castes.
• The Brahmin's primary concern is to protect "his interest" against those of the non-Brahmins; and the non-Brahmins' primary concern is to protect their interests against those of the Brahmins.
• The Hindus, therefore, are not merely an assortment of castes, but are so many warring groups, each living for itself and for its selfish ideal.
• There is another feature of caste which is deplorable. The descendants of the earlier English who fought on the opposing sides do not bear any animosity, the feud is forgotten. But the present-day non-Brahmins cannot forgive the present-day Brahmins for the insult their ancestors gave to Shivaji. The present-day Kayasthas will not forgive the present-day Brahmins for the infamy cast upon their forefathers by the forefathers of the latter.
• The existence of Caste and Caste Consciousness has served to keep the memory of past feuds between castes green, and has prevented solidarity.

Cheers!

[1] The Sahyadrikhand is a Sanskrit text that claims the supremacy of the Deshasthas Brahmins over others, especially the Konkanasthas/Chitpavan Brahmins.

 

[Nara]

Keeping the lower castes down

Hello folks,

Next, BRA states that the higher-caste Hindus have deliberately prevented the lower castes who are within the pale of Hinduism from rising to the cultural level of the higher castes. He gives two examples from two Marati communities, Sonars and Pathare Prabhus.

The following is a paraphrased version of his argument.

The case of Sonars:
The Sonars styled themselves as Daivadnya Brahmins and were wearing their "dhotis" with folds in them, and using the word namaskar for salutation, both were special to the Brahmins. Under the authority of the Peshwas, the Brahmins successfully put down this attempt on the part of the Sonars to adopt the ways of the Brahmins. They even got the President of the Councils of the East India Company's settlement in Bombay to issue a prohibitory order against the Sonars residing in Bombay.

The case of Pathare Prabhus
The Pathare Prabhus had widow-remarriage as a custom of their caste, and it was later on looked upon as a mark of social inferiority by some members of the caste, especially because it was contrary to the custom prevalent among the Brahmins. With the object of raising the status of their community, some Pathare Prabhus sought to stop this practice of widow-remarriage that was prevalent in their caste. The community was divided into two camps, one for and the other against the innovation. The Peshwas took the side of those in favour of widow-remarriage, and thus virtually prohibited the Pathare Prabhus from following the ways of the Brahmins.

Then, BRA concludes with this stinging assessment:

"The Hindus criticise the Mohammedans for having spread their religion by the use of the sword. They also ridicule Christianity on the score of the Inquisition. But really speaking, who is better and more worthy of our respect—the Mohammedans and Christians who attempted to thrust down the throats of unwilling persons what they regarded as necessary for their salvation, or the Hindu who would not spread the light, who would endeavour to keep others in darkness, who would not consent to share his intellectual and social inheritance with those who are ready and willing to make it a part of their own make-up? "
​

"I have no hesitation in saying that if the Mohammedan has been cruel, the Hindu has been mean; and meanness is worse than cruelty."
​

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

With Caste there will be no Sanghatan

BRA then claims shared camaraderie and solidarity is impossible within the Hindu caste system. Here is his arguments (edited for brevity):

• The idea underlying Sanghatan is to remove from the mind of the Hindu that timidity and cowardice which so painfully mark him off from the Mohammedan and the Sikh. The Sikh as well as the Muslim stands fearless and gives battle, because he knows that though one he will not be alone.
• The associated mode of life practised by the Sikhs and the Mohammedans produces fellow-feeling. The associated mode of life of the Hindus does not.
• Among Sikhs and Muslims there is a social cement which makes them Bhais. Among Hindus there is no such cement, and one Hindu does not regard another Hindu as his Bhai.
• So long as Caste remains, there will be no Sanghatan; and so long as there is no Sanghatan the Hindu will remain weak and meek.

BRA next takes on the oft claimed notion that Hindus are tolerant. BRA says,

"In my opinion this is a mistake. On many occasions they can be intolerant, and if on some occasions they are tolerant, that is because they are too weak to oppose or too indifferent to oppose. This indifference of the Hindus has become so much a part of their nature that a Hindu will quite meekly tolerate an insult as well as a wrong."
​

To highlight this indifference, BRA quotes William Morris, A British Socialist's exhortation to his fellow Englishmen, and what a quote it is, "The great treading down the little, the strong beating down the weak, cruel men fearing not, kind men daring not and wise men caring not."

BRA goes on to ask, "Why is the Hindu so indifferent?" and concludes, "In my opinion this indifferentism is the result of the Caste System, which has made Sanghatan and co-operation even for a good cause impossible."

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

For BRA, for political and economic reform to succeed, social reform a necessary starting point. But, BRA says, Caste is a powerful weapon for preventing all reform.

Here are his arguments:

• "The assertion by the individual of his own opinions and beliefs, [….] is the beginning of all reform. But whether the reform will continue depends upon what scope the group affords for such individual assertion. If the group is tolerant and fair-minded in dealing with such individuals, they will continue to assert [their beliefs], and in the end will succeed in converting their fellows. On the other hand if the group is intolerant, and does not bother about the means it adopts to stifle such individuals, they will perish and the reform will die out."
• "Now a caste has an unquestioned right to excommunicate any man who is guilty of breaking the rules of the caste; and as a form of punishment there is really little to choose between excommunication and death." (My aside: Just imagine the life of a poor villager, what will happen to him and his family if he is excommunicated, it would indeed be worse than death.)
• "A caste is ever ready to take advantage of the helplessness of a man, and to insist upon complete conformity to its code in letter and in spirit."
• "Caste in the hands of the orthodox has been a powerful weapon for persecuting the reformers and for killing all reform."

BRA says the following on Ethics and caste:
"A Hindu's public is his caste. His responsibility is only to his caste. His loyalty is restricted only to his caste. Virtue has become caste-ridden, and morality has become caste-bound. There is no sympathy for the deserving. There is no appreciation of the meritorious. There is no charity to the needy. Suffering as such calls for no response. "

"There is charity, but it begins with the caste and ends with the caste. There is sympathy, but not for men of other castes.
Would a Hindu acknowledge and follow the leadership of a great and good man? The case of a Mahatma apart, the answer must be that he will follow a leader if he is a man of his caste. A Brahmin will follow a leader only if he is a Brahmin, a Kayastha if he is a Kayastha, and so on. "

"The capacity to appreciate merits in a man, apart from his caste, does not exist in a Hindu. There is appreciation of virtue, but only when the man is a fellow caste-man. "

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity

Hello folks,

BRA then declares, "My ideal would be a society based on Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity." He takes each one of these three ideals for further discussion. I have once again condensed his presentation for easy reading.

Fraternity
An ideal society should be mobile, should be full of channels for conveying a change taking place in one part to other parts. In an ideal society there should be many interests consciously communicated and shared. It is essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards one's fellow men.

Liberty
…To object to […] liberty is to perpetuate slavery. For slavery does not merely mean a legalized form of subjection. It means a state of society in which some men are forced to accept from others the purposes which control their conduct. This condition obtains even where there is no slavery in the legal sense. It is found where, as in the Caste System, some persons are compelled to carry on certain prescribed callings which are not of their choice.

Equality
Equality may be a fiction, but nonetheless one must accept it as the governing principle. A man's power is dependent upon,

• physical heredity
• social inheritance or endowment in the form of parental care, education, accumulation of scientific knowledge, and finally,
• on his own efforts.

It may be just to treat men unequally so far as their efforts are unequal. But what would happen if men were treated unequally as they are unequal in the first two respects?

The reason which requires that in the third respect [his won effort] we should treat men unequally, demands that in the first two respects we should treat men as equally as possible.

There is another reason why we must accept equality. However desirable or reasonable an equitable treatment of men may be, humanity is not capable of assortment and classification. The statesman, therefore, must follow some rough and ready rule, and that rough and ready rule is to treat all men alike, not because they are alike but because classification and assortment is impossible.

The doctrine of equality is glaringly fallacious but, taking all in all, it is the only way a statesman can proceed in politics—which is a severely practical affair and which demands a severely practical test.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Chaturvarnya is impractical

BRA says, "Chaturvarnya is impracticable, is harmful, and has turned out to be a miserable failure. " He is mainly addressing Arya Samajees who wanted to replace caste system with replace it with a "worth" based varna system.

Here is his case, edited for brevity:

First difficulty
Chaturvarnya is based on worth. How are you going to compel people who have acquired a higher status based on birth, without reference to their worth, to vacate that status? How are you going to compel people to recognize the status due to a man, in accordance with his worth, who is occupying a lower status based on his birth?

Second difficulty
Chaturvarnya pre-supposes that you can classify people into four definite classes. Modern science has shown that the lumping together of individuals into a few sharply-marked-off classes is a superficial view of man, not worthy of serious consideration. Chaturvarnya must fail for it is not possible to pigeonhole men, according as they belong to one class or the other. That it is impossible to accurately classify people into four definite classes, is proved by the fact that the original four classes have now become four thousand castes.

Third difficulty
The system of Chaturvarnya must perpetually face the problem of the transgressor. Unless there is a penalty attached to the act of transgression, men will not keep to their respective classes. The whole system will break down, being contrary to human nature. Chaturvarnya cannot subsist by its own inherent goodness. It must be enforced by law.

This is proved by the story in the Ramayana of Rama killing Shambuka. Some people seem to blame Rama because he wantonly and without reason killed Shambuka. But to blame Rama for killing Shambuka is to misunderstand the whole situation. Ram Raj was a Raj based on Chaturvarnya. As a king, Rama was bound to maintain Chaturvarnya. It was his duty therefore to kill Shambuka, the Shudra who had transgressed his class and wanted to be a Brahmin. This is the reason why Rama killed Shambuka.

But this also shows that penal sanction is necessary for the maintenance of Chaturvarnya. Not only penal sanction is necessary, but the penalty of death is necessary.

Fourth difficulty
What is to happen to women in their system. Are they also to be divided into four classes, or are they to be allowed to take the status of their husbands? If the status of the woman is to be the consequence of marriage, what becomes of the underlying principle of Chaturvarnya—namely, that the status of a person should be based upon the worth of that person? If they are to be classified according to their worth, is their classification to be nominal or real? If it is to be nominal, then it is useless. If it is real, they must be prepared to have women priests and women soldiers.

Given these difficulties, I think no one except a congenital idiot could hope for and believe in a successful regeneration of the Chaturvarnya.

 

[nachi naga]

Na tvam vipradiko varno shrami nakshagocarah
Asangoasi nirakaro vishwasakshi sukhi bhav.


You are soul. You have no varna (Brahmin, kshatriya, vaishya, shudra) You have no ashrama (celibate, householder, forester,
sanyasi or renouncer), you cannot be visible for sensory organs.You are unattached, formless witness of the world.
Think on these lines and attain happiness.

 

[Nara]

Chaturvarnya - the most vicious system for the Shudras

In this section BRA points out that exploitation of one class of people by another is not uncommon, but only in India such exploitation is systematically codified into a law book that has religious authority.

The following is an edited version of BRA's arguments:


The defenders of Chaturvarnya say, why need the Shudra trouble to acquire wealth, when the three [higher] Varnas are there to support him? Why need the Shudra bother to take to education, when there is the Brahmin to whom he can go when the occasion for reading or writing arises? Why need the Shudra worry to arm himself, when there is the Kshatriya to protect him?

The theory of Chaturvarnya, understood in this sense, may be said to look upon the Shudra as the ward and the three [higher] Varnas as his guardians.

[But]..it seems to me that the system is neither fool-proof nor knave-proof. What is to happen if the Brahmins, Vaishyas, and Kshatriyas fail to pursue knowledge, to engage in economic enterprise, and to be efficient soldiers, ..suppose that they discharge their functions, but flout their duty to the Shudra or to one another?

... it must be admitted that [Chaturvarnya] makes no provision to safeguard the interests of the ward from the misdeeds of the guardian.

Why have the mass of people tolerated the social evils to which they have been subjected? ... the lower classes of Hindus have been completely disabled for direct action on account of this wretched Caste System. They could not bear arms, they could receive no education. They were condemned to be lowly; and not knowing the way of escape, and not having the means of escape, they became reconciled to eternal servitude, which they accepted as their inescapable fate.

It is true that even in Europe the strong has not shrunk from the exploitation—nay, the spoliation—of the weak. Yet the weak in Europe has had in his freedom of military service, his physical weapon; in suffering, his political weapon; and in education, his moral weapon. These three weapons for emancipation were never withheld by the strong from the weak in Europe. All these weapons were, however, denied to the masses in India by the Caste System.

There is only one period in Indian history which is a period of freedom, greatness, and glory. That is the period of the Mourya Empire. At all other times the country suffered from defeat and darkness. But the Mourya period was a period when the Caste System was completely annihilated.

 

[Nara]

Caste among Hindus and non-Hindus

Hi folks, BRA's clinical dismantling of rationale for caste continues ....

Caste and groups
In considering this question, you must at the outset bear in mind that nowhere is human society one single whole. …, the individual is one limit and society the other. Between them lie all sorts of associative arrangements of lesser and larger scope—families, friendships, co-operative associations, business combines, political parties, bands of thieves and robbers. This is true of every society, in Europe as well as in Asia.

The question to be asked in determining whether a given society is an ideal society is not whether there are groups in it, because groups exist in all societies. What social significance is attached to this group life? Is its exclusiveness a matter of custom and convenience, or is it a matter of religion? It is in the light of these questions that one must decide whether caste among Non-Hindus is the same as Caste among Hindus.

Why caste for non-Hindus is not the same as for Hindus

1. Although there are castes among Non-Hindus, as there are among Hindus, caste has not the same social significance for Non-Hindus as it has for Hindus. Ask a Mohammedan or a Sikh who he is. He tells you that he is a Mohammedan or a Sikh, as the case may be. He does not tell you his caste, although he has one; and you are satisfied with his answer. But you are not satisfied, if a person tells you that he is a Hindu. You feel bound to inquire into his caste. Why? Because so essential is caste in the case of a Hindu, that without knowing it you do not feel sure what sort of a being he is.
2. Sikhs and the Mohammedans will not outcast a Sikh or a Mohammedan if he broke his caste. But with the Hindus the case is entirely different. A Hindu is sure to be outcasted if he broke caste. This shows the difference in the social significance of caste to Hindus and Non-Hindus
3. Caste among the non-Hindus has no religious consecration; but among the Hindus most decidedly it has. They do not regard caste as a religious dogma. Religion compels the Hindus to treat isolation and segregation of castes as a virtue. Religion does not compel the Non-Hindus to take the same attitude towards caste. If Hindus wish to break caste, their religion will come in their way. But it will not be so in the case of Non-Hindus.

It is, therefore, a dangerous delusion to take comfort in the mere existence of caste among Non-Hindus, without caring to know what place caste occupies in their life and whether there are other "organic filaments" which subordinate the feeling of caste to the feeling of community. The sooner the Hindus are cured of this delusion, the better.

Caste helped Hindus survive
Hindus deny that caste presents any problem at all, Hindus have survived, and this is a proof of their fitness to survive. It seems to me that the question is not whether a community lives or dies; the question is on what plane does it live. There are different modes of survival. But not all are equally honourable. It is useless for a Hindu to take comfort in the fact that he and his people have survived. What he must consider is, what is the quality of their survival. It is a mode of survival of which every right-minded Hindu who is not afraid to own up to the truth will feel ashamed.

 

[Nara]

To destroy caste Shastras must be rejected

BRA continues his frontal assault on caste ....


How to abolish Caste?
There is a view that the first step is to abolish sub-castes. This view is based upon the supposition that there is a greater similarity in manners and status between sub-castes than there is between castes. I think this is an erroneous supposition. The Brahmins of Northern and Central India are socially of lower grade, as compared with the Brahmins of the Deccan and Southern India. Brahmins of the Deccan and Southern India, are vegetarians, and the Brahmins of Kashmir and Bengal are non-vegetarians. Brahmins of the Deccan and Southern India have more in common so far as food is concerned with such non-Brahmins as the Gujaratis, Marwaris, Banias, and Jains.

But assuming that the fusion of sub-castes is possible, what guarantee is there that the abolition of sub-castes will necessarily lead to the abolition of castes? On the contrary, it may happen that the process may stop with the abolition of sub-castes. In that case, the abolition of sub-castes will only help to strengthen the castes, and make them more powerful and therefore more mischievous. This remedy is therefore neither practicable nor effective, and may easily prove to be a wrong remedy.

Limits of inter-marriage
The real remedy is inter-marriage. Your Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal has adopted this line of attack. It is a direct and frontal attack, and I congratulate you upon a correct diagnosis, and more upon your having shown the courage to tell the Hindus what is really wrong with them.

But is your prescription the right prescription for the disease? Ask yourselves this question: why is it that a large majority of Hindus do not inter-dine and do not inter-marry?

Don't blame the people
Caste may be bad. Caste may lead to conduct so gross as to be called man's inhumanity to man. All the same, it must be recognized that the Hindus observe Caste not because they are inhuman or wrong-headed. They observe Caste because they are deeply religious. People are not wrong in observing Caste. In my view, what is wrong is their religion, which has inculcated this notion of Caste.

The real remedy
The real remedy is to destroy the belief in the sanctity of the Shastras.

How do you expect to succeed, if you allow the Shastras to continue to mould the beliefs and opinions of the people? Reformers working for the removal of untouchability, including Mahatma Gandhi, do not seem to realize that the acts of the people are merely the results of their beliefs inculcated in their minds by the Shastras, and that people will not change their conduct until they cease to believe in the sanctity of the Shastras on which their conduct is founded.

It is no use telling people that the Shastras do not say what they are believed to say, if they are grammatically read or logically interpreted. What matters is how the Shastras have been understood by the people. You must take the stand that Buddha and Guru Nanak took. You must not only discard the Shastras, you must deny their authority, as did Buddha and Nanak. You must have courage to tell the Hindus that what is wrong with them is their religion—the religion which has produced in them this notion of the sacredness of Caste. Will you show that courage?

 

[nachi naga]

bra preached one thing and practised totally another thing,by marrying a chitpavan brahmin lady as his wife.if one sees a snake and ambedkarite,let the snake live and kill ...?