Is Lord Shiva Brahmin or Nonbrahmin?

[Haridasa Siva]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I don't bother to know the caste or class origin of God/Goddess. Neither did I bother about their family or descendance. All I look forward is His/Her blessings. God gives me comfort. Some temples make you feel good eg., Kapaleeswarar Temple. Our kuladeivam temple is in a village where there is not even one brahmin family. The priests are non-brahmins and I stand in front of them with all humility. Never felt bad about it. I don't look at the poosaari but the God(dess). A rose is a rose is a rose by whatever name we call it. How does it matter to me to know the class or caste of God(dess) when all that I have to do is just worship Him/Her.

When one gets food, one just have to eat it. No need to think whether to chew or bite. Same way, when one is at a temple, one has to just pray the deity rather than to worry about His/Her origin.

 

[sarang]

I agree. Our kuladeivam temple is also in a village with NB priests. At least for 3 generations, our first (or one) mottai was done in this temple. In those (!) days we visited the temple at least once a year, but with my brothers scattered all over, our visits have also dwindled; but we send money for pujas.

My daughter had the first year 'mottai' here; our generation next is virtually NRIs. This tradition will also stop.

We are mentally conditioned to view God as a friend, father, mother, bandhu, beloved etc.; so there is no bar in attributing other qualifications to Him/Her. NBs associate a strong caste identity to their personal God.

All vedantic systems agree that only the body has varnasrama attributes, and not the soul. Thread starter is free do what is appealing.

 

[valli]

NBs associate a strong caste identity to their personal God.

Is that so? I checked with one NB and that person told that Murugan is viewed as only God and that person does not think about the caste of the God!

Kind regards

Oh, maybe you had me in your mind when you mentioned Nbrahmins!

 

[amala]

Vallika's question got me pondering. And I cannot believe I'm pondering deities castes!! Anyway was thingking in Satya Yuga it was Shriman Narayan and Sri Devi perhaps Brahmins? In Treta Yuga its Ram and Sita who were clearly Kshatriya, in Dwapara Yuga its Krishna apparently a Yadav (not sure what caste but I've read he is Shudra?) and now in Kali Yuga...well?

So it seems the "badder" we get the lower the caste? even for our gods...

 

[kunjuppu]

if i could recall, mundankanni amman koil mylapore, could be termed as my mummy's favourite deity, for she used to go there. not often, as we were not regular temple goers, but that would be the sum total of her personal temple visits.

myself used to go to kapali temple, mostly alone, for my routine is quite different from most folks, i spend a good hour near the stage, and love to watch any programs ad hoc.

according to my cousins, we do have a bhagavathy ammai temple somewhere near thrissur who is supposed to be our kuladeivam. my dad never visited the temple, and i will let it go at that....

 

[sangom]

Brahmins have apparently NB gods like "MaaDan" and "eSakki" as their kuladeivam.

 

[Nara]

...So it seems the "badder" we get the lower the caste? even for our gods...

Amala, The above statement is surely a casual statement not meant to be dissected. I get that. That is why I request you, please, do not take this personally, I mean no offense to you, or for that matter to anyone else.

The idea that we have become gradually "bad" starting from a state of perfection in an utopian satya yuga, marked by "brahmin" qualities, is a hallmark of Brahminism. It is a poisonous idea, one that Brahminism drip irrigates into the fertile young minds through ithihasa, purna, tradition, etc. We grow up getting a steady dose of this from every corner of our social life.

When we become adults, these superstitious ideas become second nature to us. This is why I have always held Brahminism is an insidious ideology, one that sneaks into the consciousness over a long period of time and gets firmly implanted in the minds of even otherwise decent and lovely people.

A mark of the fact that this spurious idea still lurks in the deep crevasses of our consciousness is this obsession with the word "Brahmin", "Brahmin" god, NB god, etc. This is why we see with almost predictable regularity, people desperately wanting to know what makes a brahmin, by birth or by behavior?

To me, this question itself is an arrogant manifestation of Brahminism. How come we never see anyone ever asking the same question about say, "Paraiyar"? Not many are in the least bit interested in a question like, are "Pariyar" born or determined by behavior? The few who do will surely assign all the vile qualities imaginable to them. This is why we do not have "Paraiyarism" but we do have "Brahminism".

This Brahminical ideology has taken such a deep root in our psyche, we may not even realize it is there. It is not easy to uproot it. It requires a lot of brutally honest introspection.

I am sure the defenders of brahminism will come out in full force to demonize me for saying all this, that is alright. I don't care. I want to speak to the people who have so obviously given up on Brahminism, but don't realize some vestiges of it may have simply receded to very deep interiors of our psyche. Very often we may not even realize it, until it comes out of its hiding place and makes us say things like as we become bad, we get lower caste gods -- which I am sure Amala did not mean literally or with any malice whatever.

These are my target audience, the youngsters who do not have a caste bone in their body. It is these people I want to talk to and encourage them to be not afraid of some brutally honest introspection. When you excise the last vestiges of Brahminism you will feel pure again.

Cheers!

 

[happyhindu]

Vallika's question got me pondering. And I cannot believe I'm pondering deities castes!! Anyway was thingking in Satya Yuga it was Shriman Narayan and Sri Devi perhaps Brahmins? In Treta Yuga its Ram and Sita who were clearly Kshatriya, in Dwapara Yuga its Krishna apparently a Yadav (not sure what caste but I've read he is Shudra?) and now in Kali Yuga...well?

So it seems the "badder" we get the lower the caste? even for our gods...

Amala dear, any specific reason why you think so? I dunno about yugas. But i think Narayana is a mystery. Because Narayana appears in Vedas (as in Narayana Sukta) but is also worshipped by the south-central dravidian (telugu) speakers since an ancient time. Ram and Sita were imo austroasiatic (naga gods) and hence aryan. I have no idea if they wud have fitted any varna as applicable in those times. Krishna is a shudra? Well maybe He is/was a shudraabhira who fought against Indra's armies...Varnas for Gods can be confusing isn't it?

 

[ramani.l]

pranms valli I can understand people's inquisitness to expand thier knowledge thro questioning and acquitance they have,. But still the basic question itself who belongs to what class?based on thier atttitude or foodhabits or the way they brought up or because of thier ancesters or the way inwhich they earn thier livelywood? notanswered,i doubt whethere is it possible to ascertain the difference between god and devas, devas and asuras, asuas and human beings and on which class or socalled identy called caste they belongs to?

 

[suraju06]

Hi Valli,

Just wondering loudly, when the creator or superhead the God is beyond all caste categories, how come the people who He created come with all the caste baggages? How nice it would be when a day comes we can say - a Human remains Human - not a brahmin nor a kshatriya nor a shudra nor a dalit. He is beyond all this!! src="http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/images/smilies/smile.png" border="0" alt="" title="Smile" smilieid="1" class="inlineimg"> Even though it is the truth that a human remain a human, how many of us have shed the caste baggage?

When there is only one entity there is no scope to differentiate, categorize,classify etc., God is one but God's creations are countless with a lot of variety.  So they(not God nor any one group among the creations) tend to form themselves into various groups  on the basis of various parameters as they perceive.  I do not subscribe to the theory that it is only in Hinduism that such divisions exist.  Every society has such divisions-only the names are different.  Caste is a unnecessary baggage only for those who discriminate and bring in superiority and inferiority tags on the basis of castes.

Even though that's the truth is that how most brahmins think? No.

Many brahmins, if not all, know this and understands the significance of this.

I know lot of Iyengars who go to temples but would not step into the saiva complex of gods! They go into the vaishnava complex and pray only to the Iyengar Gods!!

I will correct your above sentence.  Instead of 'Iyengar Gods', I would take it that you mean Vishnu. Otherwise it would give a false impression that Iyengar Gods are worshiped by Iyengars and iyer gods are worshiped by iyers etc. which is not true.This particular practice followed by vaishnavites has already been explained here earlier also. Suffice it to say that Iyengars worshipping vishnu exclusively is based on their belief system. If it is their personal god what is the issue. Why should we insist that they should worship every god in the pantheon? To prove what? To whom? and finally why should they prove it? They worship God and it is enough for me. You worship Siva as God. An Iyengar friend may worship Vishnu as God and another friend of you may worship Murugan as God and another Vinayaka.I see only this that you all worship God. This is what is said in the thirumurai as "oru naamam oruruvam onrumillaarkku aayiram thirunaamam koori naam thellenam kottome". If you look for only holes you will find them in plenty. That is what is called prejudice. Let us get rid of this prejudice and look at individuals and accept them for what they are.

Yes, on rare occassions brahmins do go to these temples, but you said "pray" - I don't think so! When I was small we had this occassion where my Periappa was invitied to be the honour guest during some funtion in their temple. We all did attend but I can clearly remember the attitude/thinking of the brahmin elders! Maybe there are a few brahmins who are exceptions and do pray to these gods!

There are many brahmins who do pray before these deities.
Cheers.

 

[amala]

Amala, The above statement is surely a casual statement not meant to be dissected. I get that. That is why I request you, please, do not take this personally, I mean no offense to you, or for that matter to anyone else.

The idea that we have become gradually "bad" starting from a state of perfection in an utopian satya yuga, marked by "brahmin" qualities, is a hallmark of Brahminism. It is a poisonous idea, one that Brahminism drip irrigates into the fertile young minds through ithihasa, purna, tradition, etc. We grow up getting a steady dose of this from every corner of our social life.

When we become adults, these superstitious ideas become second nature to us. This is why I have always held Brahminism is an insidious ideology, one that sneaks into the consciousness over a long period of time and gets firmly implanted in the minds of even otherwise decent and lovely people.

A mark of the fact that this spurious idea still lurks in the deep crevasses of our consciousness is this obsession with the word "Brahmin", "Brahmin" god, NB god, etc. This is why we see with almost predictable regularity, people desperately wanting to know what makes a brahmin, by birth or by behavior?

To me, this question itself is an arrogant manifestation of Brahminism. How come we never see anyone ever asking the same question about say, "Paraiyar"? Not many are in the least bit interested in a question like, are "Pariyar" born or determined by behavior? The few who do will surely assign all the vile qualities imaginable to them. This is why we do not have "Paraiyarism" but we do have "Brahminism".

This Brahminical ideology has taken such a deep root in our psyche, we may not even realize it is there. It is not easy to uproot it. It requires a lot of brutally honest introspection.

I am sure the defenders of brahminism will come out in full force to demonize me for saying all this, that is alright. I don't care. I want to speak to the people who have so obviously given up on Brahminism, but don't realize some vestiges of it may have simply receded to very deep interiors of our psyche. Very often we may not even realize it, until it comes out of its hiding place and makes us say things like as we become bad, we get lower caste gods -- which I am sure Amala did not mean literally or with any malice whatever.

These are my target audience, the youngsters who do not have a caste bone in their body. It is these people I want to talk to and encourage them to be not afraid of some brutally honest introspection. When you excise the last vestiges of Brahminism you will feel pure again.

Cheers!

Nara mama and HHJi,

Perhaps i wasn't clear. I was (trying to be a neutral observer) merely stating the impression that I am getting from contemplating the yugas and our deities, which is why i said "it seems" (to me).

Rama was born in treta yuga isn't it? And he was a prince/king. The next yuga he is downgraded to a cowherd. As the yugas go by our deities "seem" to decline in status (caste not withstanding). Prima facie that is the impression i'm getting, unfortunately. Perhaps I was reading too much into it. Perhaps its just a coincidence.

I hear you and HH about Brahminism.

 

[Nara]

....Perhaps i wasn't clear. I was (trying to be a neutral observer) merely stating the impression that I am getting from contemplating the yugas and our deities, which is why i said "it seems" (to me).

Dear Amala, I was not commenting on the kind of neutral observation of "low" and "high varna" by anthropologists motivated by nothing more than an objective academic analysis. My observation was only about neutral and reasonable people who reject the varna system that is so central to Brahminism, and yet may unwittingly carry some vestiges of it.

Rama was born in treta yuga isn't it? And he was a prince/king.

All this talk of yugas, and the incarnations during those yugas is how Brahminism drip irrigates their insidious ideology into young and fertile minds.

I hear you and HH about Brahminism.

Yes, I know you would.

best ...

 

[H.Krishnamurthy]

Dear Amlaji,
First you have to under stand one thing. It is certainly not Degradation or what ever it is as stated in you reply.
Of late ( less than 1000 years say ), the science or the western world discovered that the entire world was only with water and on gradual global warming Land started forming accomodating human and other living kind to live.
The result Snow Caps at the poles.
Fine coming back to Hindu mythology consider Dasavatharams imagined ( or Felt)by our ancestors .
It starts with Macha vadharam , Fish living only in water then the avdharam like Tortoise , can live in both land and Water and other avadharams followed later.
Like wise Rama Avadharam , a prince by birth and then the King of Ayodhya, like wise the later avadharams of Balram and Krishna also belongs to Royal Family but lived like an ordinary Yadava , winning the hearts of 1000 s and 1000s of ordinary people. The other things are also explained as almost all Maharajas of then were saluting Lord Krishna.
We cannot frame any rule like Varna Caste for these avadhara purushas.
Hence the question of degrading does not arise at all.
Same case with Navagrahas established in our old temples.
Entire world discovered that Sun is the main element of the universe and the earth we live in is just a small dust in the Solar Family, much prior to that our ancestor have understood this and have constructed the position of Navagrahas in the Temples.
There is no written document that how they could make it out for this but still there are physical proff available.
Sorry by any mean if I have hurt yr feeling still feel to express.
Thanks

Nara mama and HHJi,

Perhaps i wasn't clear. I was (trying to be a neutral observer) merely stating the impression that I am getting from contemplating the yugas and our deities, which is why i said "it seems" (to me).

Rama was born in treta yuga isn't it? And he was a prince/king. The next yuga he is downgraded to a cowherd. As the yugas go by our deities "seem" to decline in status (caste not withstanding). Prima facie that is the impression i'm getting, unfortunately. Perhaps I was reading too much into it. Perhaps its just a coincidence.

I hear you and HH about Brahminism.

 

[sangom]

Amala dear, any specific reason why you think so? I dunno about yugas. But i think Narayana is a mystery. Because Narayana appears in Vedas (as in Narayana Sukta) but is also worshipped by the south-central dravidian (telugu) speakers since an ancient time. Ram and Sita were imo austroasiatic (naga gods) and hence aryan. I have no idea if they wud have fitted any varna as applicable in those times. Krishna is a shudra? Well maybe He is/was a shudraabhira who fought against Indra's armies...Varnas for Gods can be confusing isn't it?

Smt. HappyHindu,

There is no God or Deva called Narayana in the rigveda; there is a Rishi by name Narayana who is supposed to have authored the well-known Purusha Sukta. The Narayana Sukta which you refer to is not known to me. But there are more than one Narayanopanishad and the one version contained in Krishna Yajurveda seems to be the most popular.

I also do not understand how "austro-asiatic gods can be called "hence Aryan"; kindly elaborate.

 

[happyhindu]

Smt. HappyHindu,

There is no God or Deva called Narayana in the rigveda; there is a Rishi by name Narayana who is supposed to have authored the well-known Purusha Sukta. The Narayana Sukta which you refer to is not known to me. But there are more than one Narayanopanishad and the one version contained in Krishna Yajurveda seems to be the most popular.

I also do not understand how "austro-asiatic gods can be called "hence Aryan"; kindly elaborate.

Dear Sir,

I was referring to Narayana Suktam of the Taittriya Aranyaka of Krishna Yajurveda which refers to Narayana: .. Narayana Sukta ..

As regards nagas, i am somewhat taken up by the idea that austroasiatic groups were the earliest inhabitants of india. Somehow it seemed to me (based on readings so far) that the later groups who arrived (including the kurus) were merely trying to get a foothold in an existing aryan society; and succeeded in doing so. And this is probably reflected in our itihaasas and puranas (probably even vedas). Also, i am persuming that the geneology of Rama has some Naga characters (bcoz of names like ahinaga). So maybe Rama had something to do with Naga lineages. All this is just a supposition or speculation from my end though.

Regards.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Amala



A few years ago we (my husband and I) came to know from a Srilankan Tamil friend that they don't celebrate Deepavali!!

We know that north Indians celebrate diwali to rejoice the killing of Ravana and to celebrate Rama's victory! As per what the Srilankan friend said - Diwali is a sad day for them - the day when their fellow man was killed! And he was surprised and accused my husband how come Tamilians in India celebrate that day!

My husband had to explain to him that we tamilians have a different reason - it is to celebrate the death of Narakasuran and not Ravanan!

Kind regards

Sowbagyavathy Valli, Greetings.

I viewed this thread only today.

Siva, Ganesa and Muruga do not belong to Brahmin caste. If they are any God with salt, then they would be beyond any caste divisions. I am just a 'also ran' human being; even I am beyond caste divisions, why not those divine charecters?

Hinduism is a mixture of few faiths. Siva was the primary diety for Saivam; so was Ganesa for Ganapathyam and Murugan was for Koumaaram. When those three were clubbed together, just for convenience sake, Siva was considered as the father for Ganesa and Muruga. I don't know about others, I never took these things seriously even when I was a devotee and when I was performing daily Poojas etc.

From what I gather, a part oof the north Indians celeberate Deepavali as the day Lord Rama came back to Ayodhya after his exile to the forset; that's all. It has nothing to do with Ravana.

By the way, Deepavali is not celeberated in Kerala either. From what little I gathered, Srilankan Tamizh has a distinct mixture of Malayalam. There are a few monosyllabic communications common to Keralites and Srilankan Tamils. A large portion of Malayalees are Lord Muruga devotees. I think it is strange that Tamizh people portray Murugan as 'Tamizh Kadavul'. Here I am not even tryiing... here is a Malayalam song.... naran song - YouTube .

Poonool does not indicate a person as a Brahmin. In my village, கருமான், ஆசாரி, செட்டியார்also wear ponool on regular basis. All the castes except Harijans wear poonool during their wedding. As per the varna standards, brahma, Kshatriya and Vaisya varnas wore poonool on the regular basis.

So, as far as I know, Lord Siva is neither a Brahmin nor a Non-Brahmin. He is beyond that. When you read Rudram, his names would be so varied, you may not asign a caste for him.

Cheers!

 

[valli]

pranms valli I can understand people's inquisitness to expand thier knowledge thro questioning and acquitance they have,. But still the basic question itself who belongs to what class?based on thier atttitude or foodhabits or the way they brought up or because of thier ancesters or the way inwhich they earn thier livelywood? notanswered,i doubt whethere is it possible to ascertain the difference between god and devas, devas and asuras, asuas and human beings and on which class or socalled identy called caste they belongs to?

Dear Shri Ramani

Thanks for replying and welcome to the forum.

Kind regards

 

[Raji Ram]

Does anyone argue how men and women in this world can get married IF they are all descendants of Adam and Eve

and hence become brothers and sisters? I don't thinks so. Only our community takes pride (!) in arguing about the

caste of Gods and Goddesses ... even start researching their sub divisions in Bs!! God is God and we become devotees

of whom ever we like.

IMHO, மனித இனத்தை ஜாதிகளை வைத்து சீரழித்தது போதுமே! பாவம்! கடவுளரை விட்டுவிடலாமே! :hail:

 

[sangom]

Does anyone argue how men and women in this world can get married IF they are all descendants of Adam and Eve

and hence become brothers and sisters? I don't thinks so. Only our community takes pride (!) in arguing about the

caste of Gods and Goddesses ... even start researching their sub divisions in Bs!! God is God and we become devotees

of whom ever we like.

IMHO, மனித இனத்தை ஜாதிகளை வைத்து சீரழித்தது போதுமே! பாவம்! கடவுளரை விட்டுவிடலாமே! :hail:

மனித இனத்தைச் சீரழித்தாயிற்று. இனிமேல் செய்ய முடியாது because of Constitution of India and the Laws. அதனால் அடுத்தது கடவுள்களுக்கும் ஒரு sample கொடுப்போமேன் - அவர்களும் கஷ்டப்பெட்டு சீரழியும்போதாவது அடுத்த அவதாரம் எடுத்து மனிதர்களுக்கு சரியான வழியைச் சொல்லித்தரமாட்டார்களா

 

[biswa]

This question came to my mind just today!

I have known that Lord Shiva is the God who takes care of death! He is also known to be the God who dwells among graveyards and adorns himself with the ashes!

Then I have the following questions

1. How come he is a brahmin if he dwells in the graveyard? (Is he SC/ST?)

Umm, I thought caste was a human invention? Won't assigning a caste to a God make him a human invention too? Oops sorry that is a discussion for another (highly popular) thread.

On a more serious note, Valli, there is no caste/creed once you go above a certain altitude. After all Lord Shiva lives on Mt. Kailasha. From there all humans look the same.

 

[Govinda]

On a more serious note, Valli, there is no caste/creed once you go above a certain altitude. After all Lord Shiva lives on Mt. Kailasha. From there all humans look the same.

This must be a joke, All humans would then look like ants Next question, then, are humans and ants same ?

The genetics/nature is inherent in every form, be it a deva or jiva, but it is the 'level of the nature' that distinguishes every one. This is exactly, why our vedic texts consider the whole Creation/Reality as product of Three GunAs.

 

[Govinda]

Dear All

1. How come Lord Shiva is a brahmin if he dwells in the graveyard? (Is he SC/ST?)

Kind regards

As said in Purusha Suktam (Rig Veda), Purusha (the greatest Person) hosts the Matter (with 3 gunas) and Selfs(jivas +Karma) subtly before creation. The jivas take various forms(bodies of matter) according to karma.

Primal Creation(Prakruti) itself is said to possess tri-gunas. So, upanishads even compared or personified the trinity (Vishnu, Brahma, Shiva/Rudra) as the tri-gunas, sattva, tamas, rajas respectively.

If you read Bhagavad Gita, 18th chapter esp. verse 14 given as follows:
"Brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras are distinguished by their qualities of work, in accordance with the modes of nature."

The varna/class is by birth, the body/matter is formed from the subtle elements (5 jnana, 5 karma indriyas or subtle senses and the mind) which again is three-fold based on the tri- gunas. So, our complete genetic make-up is decided at birth, based on past-karma. Every form has a mixture of tri-gunas, but by birth we are pre-dominantly one nature/guna. And the Varnas are just labels to define one's predominant nature.

You are right, Rudra was considered fiery and passionate, wearing skulls, deer skin and matted hair (meaning fervently yogic). Rudra was also symbolically associated with ego and red color (Rajas). We may see in puranas, Ravana, Hiranaya kasipu, etc meditated deeply on Rudra/Brahma to fight against Rama/Vishnu etc. Thus those Forms were prayed to achieve some material feats or other goals, whereas enlightenment/moksha would be attained by the worship of Vishnu avatars/Forms. One may find his in the Gita Quote 7:23 " Those who worship the devas, go to their planets , but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet (vaikuntam)." So, the Shiva's Nature is associate with latter varnas.

'Shiva' means auspiciousness, in Sankrit, names are verbal nouns. In Vishnu Sahasranama, and in all vedic texts/puranas, one may find that Vishnu is also addressed as Shiva, Hiranyagarbha(womb of creation), sambhu(origin),mahEsvara etc... Rudra was called as Lord Shiva, possibly during the Mahabharata/Krishna period, when Duryodana/Jarasanda(Magadha) had a support of the North-east regions (populated/migrated srilankan-yakshas/nagas/kashmiris) etc, and Krishna wanted to make amicable friendship with them [later Arjuna himself got lost in Shiva!]. Thus all eastern tantra/practices, different icons became Vedic Shiva's Pantheon. Kashi(Magadha) became the seat of poly-theism/diversity. Then, cholas brought this culture down south. Else, My guess, the earlier Brahmins wouldn't have encouraged non-vedic worship. Later, these tantras/agamas must have been defined as per vedic injunctions. Anyway, now, we do not know which one is vedic or not

 

[biswa]

This must be a joke, All humans would then look like ants Next question, then, are humans and ants same ?

The genetics/nature is inherent in every form, be it a deva or jiva, but it is the 'level of the nature' that distinguishes every one. This is exactly, why our vedic texts consider the whole Creation/Reality as product of Three GunAs.

You have taken the words right out of my mouth! I was actually going to mention that humans would look like just like ants, but I thought I might offend someone.

It is a joke, but also maybe not. I sincerely believe that caste issues among humans would appear to Lord Shiva to be as insignificant as color/colony issues among ants. Or perhaps even more insignificant as ants far outnumber humans. It is only our ego that makes us appear bigger in our own eyes.

 

[Govinda]

It is a joke, but also maybe not. I sincerely believe that caste issues among humans would appear to Lord Shiva to be as insignificant as color/colony issues among ants. Or perhaps even more insignificant as ants far outnumber humans. It is only our ego that makes us appear bigger in our own eyes.

True.

Quantitatively, The Lord ordains the law of karma impartially, hence the jiva/form is insignificant.

But Qualitatively, both for the Lord and for us, We are definitely significant and higher intellectuals than ants, so the demarcation among us, in the name of Spirituality or Good-Qualities should make sense. The Varna is a label to remind us of our adherence to qualities and its practice and a marker for improvement, there is nothing to be proud or ashamed off. Only when we started to attach Status to the Varna, as in the recent past, we tripped off badly.

 

[Nara]

....The genetics/nature is inherent in every form, be it a deva or jiva, but it is the 'level of the nature' that distinguishes every one. This is exactly, why our vedic texts consider the whole Creation/Reality as product of Three GunAs.

Such breathtaking confidence, only the religious can muster such certainty with absolutely no evidence.

Hear you scientists, don't you know, all the answers are in Vedic texts and BG, all you have to do is simply believe and not ask too many inconvenient questions. If you persist in asking questions, that would mean you are predominated by tamasa guna.

Don't you worry, BG gives you an iron clad guarantee that you will get another birth, and in that birth, may be you will have lot of satva guna and you will not ask too many questions.

Cheers!