Is the caste system weakness of Hinduism?

[happyhindu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Damn, this happens only when I reply to your post. Happening for the 2nd time. I typed a mighty long response and then lost everything when the system asked me to log in. I am too bored to type this again so for the time being I will just leave as it is.

No worries.

Am looking forward to an answer only for this question (made bold):

Obviously, you are not a dharmashastra follower if you

a) send your daughter to school
b) send your daughter / wife to work
c) do not keep the women of your house as dependents on you (women are not allowed to be independent).
d) conduct ceremonies for shudras (since shudras are not allowed to listen or recite vedas).

Obviously, priests have been conducting things from weddings and naming ceremonies of babies, to death rituals for "shudras" for so long. Why some 'shudras' even built temples and decided on appointment of priests. To make matters worse, there are 'shudras' in the present time who consider themselves as the 'noveau poor' and the brahmins as the 'noveau riche', and will claim that "brahmins survived off us for so long and now they talk...".

So, how many 'brahmins' are following smrithis as an "authority" just as the vedas today? Esp if they are not even following the above 4 points. And if they are not following smrithis, can they still be called smarthas (followers of smrithis) ?

Please also explain on what basis do you say that dharmashastras are based on vedas, esp, based on the below:

1) Vedas have had female hymn composers. Dharmashastras prohibit education to women.

2) Vedas do not mention heredity occupations. Atharva veda clearly mentions that a king was an 'elected leader". Dharmashastras mention, or have been interpreted to mean, occupations fixed by birth.

Please provide me with any source that explains how the law-books came to be based on vedas. No 'logic" or articles without references please.

Regards.

 

[anandb]

This is exactly the point I am trying to make. Some of the Vedas were revealed to women means the women were held in exalted status during the Vedic age. Now the Acharyas say the Smiritis were definitely composed in the spirit of the Srutis which makes me think that what is available on the net (about sastras) are crap. I believe that and for me the only reference point is the tradition of Sankara which is no good to you. We can keep arguing about this endlessly to a point of fatigue. From your stance, I gather that you have spoken to ekadanti monks about this but not really to an Acharya of the Sankara tradition. I think you should really talk to an Acharya of the Sankara Mutt about derogatory clauses on castes and women and seek his views on it.

 

[happyhindu]

This is exactly the point I am trying to make. Some of the Vedas were revealed to women means the women were held in exalted status during the Vedic age. Now the Acharyas say the Smiritis were definitely composed in the spirit of the Srutis which makes me think that what is available on the net (about sastras) are crap. I believe that and for me the only reference point is the tradition of Sankara which is no good to you. We can keep arguing about this endlessly to a point of fatigue. From your stance, I gather that you have spoken to ekadanti monks about this but not really to an Acharya of the Sankara tradition. I think you should really talk to an Acharya of the Sankara Mutt about derogatory clauses on castes and women and seek his views on it.

This explanation does not suffice anand.

Just by saying what is available on the internet is crap, won't do. The ones who have translated some smrithis are TBs.

It is very clear that manusmrithi prohibits education to women and does not permit a woman to be independent (she has to depend on the males of her family). It is also clear that the Kanchi mutt propagates smrithis.

Am not interested in personal POVs.

Why don't you provide sources, which explain the basis of the acharyas, for holding the POV that the shrutis are the basis for smrithi.

I had spoken to TBs who had spoken to acharyas of kanchi mutt on the derogatory clauses on castes and women. Their explanation is no diff from the one mentioned on the kamakoti article. Why don't you ask them and enlighten all of us here? We wud all stand to benefit from their explanations.

 

[anandb]

Yes there are downtrodden people. You see them in slums, villages, cities, everywhere. In the north, it is especially pronounced. Its not an uncommon sight to see a bhangi being called a bhangi directly on his face and being treated like s**t.


Same here.

I do not see any NBs interested in religion. I ventured into honing sanskrit skills, learning abt scriptures, etc on my own. And for that, i was (and am) considered an utterly useless good-for-nothing person.

Its the so-called 'dalits' that are interested in religious studies, not the regular NBs. And not all 'dalits' are intrested in that either. The smarter ones know the path to success is money, not shastras. But anyways, there are ppl amongst them that are spiritually inclined, not interested in materialism, and yearn to study in vedic schools. Who are we to stop them?

I have no idea what makes mutts control admission to vedic schools, what makes 'brahmins' of these mutts so determined not to allow other castes to receive vedic education...

Smt. Renuka and Smt. HH,

It is highly commendable that you both had ventured into Sanskrit and Vedic studies against all odds. I wish everyone (including brahmins which also includes me) take a leaf out of it and follow it. The scriptures are a universal knowledge which should be shared with everyone irrespective of any barriers. May your tribe increase.

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

This explanation does not suffice anand.

Just by saying what is available on the internet is crap, won't do. The ones who have translated some smrithis are TBs.

It is very clear that manusmrithi prohibits education to women and does not permit a woman to be independent (she has to depend on the males of her family). It is also clear that the Kanchi mutt propagates smrithis.

Am not interested in personal POVs.

Why don't you provide sources, which explain the basis of the acharyas, for holding the POV that the shrutis are the basis for smrithi.

I had spoken to TBs who had spoken to acharyas of kanchi mutt on the derogatory clauses on castes and women. Their explanation is no diff from the one mentioned on the kamakoti article. Why don't you ask them and enlighten all of us here? We wud all stand to benefit from their explanations.

I have a reason to call it crap. Some time back I came across these passages supposedly written by Manu exalting women. I will give below

"Where women are honored there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honored no sacred rite yields rewards," declares Manu Smriti (III.56) a text on social conduct.
"Women must be honored and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands and brothers-in-law, who desire their own welfare." (Manu Smriti III, 55)
" Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers." (Manu Smriti III, 57).
"The houses on which female relations, not being duly honored, pronounce a curse perish completely as if destroyed by magic." (Manu Smriti III, 58)
" Hence men who seek their own welfare, should always honor women on holidays and festivals with gifts of ornaments, clothes, and dainty food." (Manu Smriti III, 59)
"If a husband dies, a wife may marry another husband.
"If a husband deserts his wife, she may marry another." (Manu, chapter IX, verse 77).

Now I have also come across the same guy denigrating the women so badly that even men will cringe (unfortunately I don't have links to these). Unless the Manu is a loony and there are several of them he cannot be praising and denigrating women in the same text. In fact certain pundits say when in doubt refer to the original Vedas or the Upanishads which seem to have been tampered with in minimum.

Honestly, even if the translations are by a TB, I would like to look into his intentions. A lot of brahmins during the British times took pride in acting and behaving English. And there is evidence that disinformation was a major tool used by the British in their "Divide and Rule". They knew that one way of disuniting is sow the seeds of inferiority in their own religion in terms of customs, rituals and what not. What better way than to play with the Sastras which directly governed the way people lived. I am not saying this is what happened but there is a high possibility. Especially when you see contradictory messages within the same sutra or Apastamba contradicting with Gautama. The Hindus will think either the dharmasastras were the work of lunatics or the seers had lost their marbles when composing them. Either way the purpose is achieved.

Thanks

 

[sapthajihva]

Hello,

Hi,
There is a habit in this forum to simply ignore hard questions. This has happened to me one too many times.

1. Sapthajihva did not answer what good can be had with the caste system that cannot be had otherwise.

................

Since you have questioned it again, I am recounting:

• Your claim was that caste/varna, ipso facto discriminates - I said it is not and asked you to support your assertion logically.
• In reply you gave examples to support your claim. My counter was that examples can be both ways. Hence examples alone do not prove the assertion.
• To prove an assertion free from all doubts one should be able to logically support it, which you did not. I gave you an analogy which you brushed it as 'constructing strawmen' without logically countering it.
• Since your assertion itself is not convincing, we cannot delve into the case. Simple.
• The day you prove logically that caste/varna discriminates (adversely), I will give you the benefits of varna.

Nobody is running away from answers. If you want to view it otherwise, I have no say.

Regards,

 

[happyhindu]

I have a reason to call it crap. Some time back I came across these passages supposedly written by Manu exalting women. I will give below

"Where women are honored there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honored no sacred rite yields rewards," declares Manu Smriti (III.56) a text on social conduct.
"Women must be honored and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands and brothers-in-law, who desire their own welfare." (Manu Smriti III, 55)
" Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers." (Manu Smriti III, 57).
"The houses on which female relations, not being duly honored, pronounce a curse perish completely as if destroyed by magic." (Manu Smriti III, 58)
" Hence men who seek their own welfare, should always honor women on holidays and festivals with gifts of ornaments, clothes, and dainty food." (Manu Smriti III, 59)
"If a husband dies, a wife may marry another husband.
"If a husband deserts his wife, she may marry another." (Manu, chapter IX, verse 77).

Now I have also come across the same guy denigrating the women so badly that even men will cringe (unfortunately I don't have links to these). Unless the Manu is a loony and there are several of them he cannot be praising and denigrating women in the same text. In fact certain pundits say when in doubt refer to the original Vedas or the Upanishads which seem to have been tampered with in minimum.

I already mentioned to you that there are verses saying one thing (like praising women) on one hand and there are verses saying the opposite (ike denigrating women) on the other hand.

All those verses denigrating women and giving exalted position to brahmins were added later to the manu smrithi. They are interpolations.

Manu was not a loony.

This is what the acharyas of kanchi mutt fail to see.

The kamakoti articles do not acknowledge the interpolations; nor do they address which of the verses to follow and which to shed. Why?

The stand / position taken by the kanchi mutt is something like this --
a) smrithis are to be considered equal in authority to vedas
b) brahmins did not create them for self-benefit
(in today's times, with the kind of research available, only an ignorant person wud think the interpolated verses were not created by brahmins for self-benefit).
c) smrithis are valid for all times
(but sir, they do consititute laws written in the 2nd century or earlier - how to follow them in this century - it is like mullahs expecting the whole world to live in the medieval times of sharia laws).

Honestly, even if the translations are by a TB, I would like to look into his intentions. A lot of brahmins during the British times took pride in acting and behaving English. And there is evidence that disinformation was a major tool used by the British in their "Divide and Rule". They knew that one way of disuniting is sow the seeds of inferiority in their own religion in terms of customs, rituals and what not. What better way than to play with the Sastras which directly governed the way people lived. I am not saying this is what happened but there is a high possibility.

Yes perhaps there is a high possibility that the interpolations were added to the manusmrithi in the colonial period. Why blame the british alone? Why not also blame the scribes (that is the brahmins who cud write in sanskrit) for adding the interpolations ? Truly, all the claims of brahmin superiority seems to have happened only since the colonial times. Otherwise, who wud bother to give importance to people who conducted rituals for them...Am sorry for the crude language used (i promise i am trying to use the best language i can, but the content itself is such that i am at a loss how to express things without causing hurt).

Anyways, if the interpolations were added in the british times, does that not mean that the stand / position taken by acharyas (as mentioned above) is a short-sighted one?

Except Sri Adi Shankara, only paramacharya and few other shankaracharyas, have produced shlokas and writings in sanskrit. Is there something lacking in the depth of spriritual ability in case of the rest? For those who are the authority in hinduism, why is there so little output from them in terms of literature, or research producing bhasyams? Wud that be not one of the reasons why they are not able to provide proper leadership and guidance to the masses?

Regards.

 

[Nara]

...

Nobody is running away from answers.

Dear Sapthajihva, Greetings!

I clearly stated we agreed to end the discussion by mutual consent. I was only saying that my question remains unanswered and it still does. Let me restate that question:

What good does the varna/caste system provide that cannot be had otherwise?​

Irrespective of the reason why Varna system exists, please let me know what good it does to people, especially those who are at the bottom.

Nobody has answered this question, yet.

Happy New Year!

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

I already mentioned to you that there are verses saying one thing (like praising women) on one hand and there are verses saying the opposite (ike denigrating women) on the other hand.

All those verses denigrating women and giving exalted position to brahmins were added later to the manu smrithi. They are interpolations.

Manu was not a loony.

This is what the acharyas of kanchi mutt fail to see.

The kamakoti articles do not acknowledge the interpolations; nor do they address which of the verses to follow and which to shed. Why?

The stand / position taken by the kanchi mutt is something like this --
a) smrithis are to be considered equal in authority to vedas
b) brahmins did not create them for self-benefit
(in today's times, with the kind of research available, only an ignorant person wud think the interpolated verses were not created by brahmins for self-benefit).
c) smrithis are valid for all times
(but sir, they do consititute laws written in the 2nd century or earlier - how to follow them in this century - it is like mullahs expecting the whole world to live in the medieval times of sharia laws).


Yes perhaps there is a high possibility that the interpolations were added to the manusmrithi in the colonial period. Why blame the british alone? Why not also blame the scribes (that is the brahmins who cud write in sanskrit) for adding the interpolations ? Truly, all the claims of brahmin superiority seems to have happened only since the colonial times. Otherwise, who wud bother to give importance to people who conducted rituals for them...Am sorry for the crude language used (i promise i am trying to use the best language i can, but the content itself is such that i am at a loss how to express things without causing hurt).

Anyways, if the interpolations were added in the british times, does that not mean that the stand / position taken by acharyas (as mentioned above) is a short-sighted one?

Except Sri Adi Shankara, only paramacharya and few other shankaracharyas, have produced shlokas and writings in sanskrit. Is there something lacking in the depth of spriritual ability in case of the rest? For those who are the authority in hinduism, why is there so little output from them in terms of literature, or research producing bhasyams? Wud that be not one of the reasons why they are not able to provide proper leadership and guidance to the masses?

Regards.

Sow. HH,

We seem to be running around in circles with no end in sight. If the purpose is to create fatigue, you can be glad you have achieved that. Firstly, I am slowly coming to the conclusion that you have a high degree of bias against the Sankara mutts. The reason is your comments in the last paragraph which has no connection with the stuff we are discussing now. To answer that first, whether the hundreds of Acharyas have produced enough literature or not is something that you can answer better than me due to your research oriented approach. To me, I care less. The very fact that these mutts have continued to exist from the times of Adi Shankara with a continuous succession of Acharyas means something, may be not to you. This tradition is not measured in terms of literary output they produce. The Acharyas are not professors in a university whose professorship depends on the number of journals they produce. The very fact these Acharyas are living provide succor to the people who seek them. I don't know if you believe in the concept of poojas. The Chandramoulisvara pooja is performed everyday by these Acharyas from the times of Adi Sankara. Apart from that the mutts are involved in a variety of other dharmic activities. To equate them to research producing bhasyam in lines with scientists and medicos is a bit shocking to me.

Your next comment is even more strange. Are you equating output (in terms of research) with leadership? How have you concluded they have not provided proper leadership and guidance to the masses? Let me know?

HH, You have actually perfectly validated the stand of the Kanchi mutt yourself. Now let us follow the logical sequence.

1. It is generally accepted that the Vedas and Upanishads speak noble truths, are not discriminatory against anything whether castes or women. (hope we agree on this)

2. You and me both agree that the shastras say good things and bad things. From your reply above, I infer that the discriminatory verses (whether denigrating women or exalted status to brahmins) are interpolations (ie) added later.

3. The Paramacharya says that the Smritis derive their authority from the Srutis and cannot be otherwise.

4. Point 3 further indicates then that the Smiritis cannot be discriminatory (if points 1 and 2 are true)

5. This further leads to the conclusions that the discriminatory interpolations have to be discarded. (You say yourself that the Kanchi Mutt do not acknowledge the interpolations).

6. The Mutt need not specifically say which part of the dharmasastra needs to be followed or not because their position regarding this is crystal clear. (by saying the Smrtis are derived from the non-discriminatory Srutis).

7. This has also got to be tied to the other teachings, lectures and discourses of the Paramacharya. There is not a single place where he advocates discrimination. He also says as brahmins seem to be following the mutt mostly they will get the message of his teachings.

Going back to your point b.) brahmins did not create them for self-benefit. Can you show me where the Acharya or the mutt says this? To me, if the Mutt is rejecting the interpolations it is automatic that the people responsible for the interpolations are also rejected. My point is these people could be brahmins or non-brahmins. Just because the clauses are loaded against non-brahmins do not mean they were created by brahmins only. If the purpose is disinformation to create animosity, anything becomes fair game. Fanatical elements don't come with a caste name.

Going back to your point no. c.) Smrithis are valid for all times. My question is why they should not be? If we all agree to discard the discriminatory clauses then what is left can be an excellent guide to how lead a life in modern times. Just looking at the 10 yamas and niyamas in the Upanishads, we can see they are valid for all times.

I don't know where I gave the impression that I am supporting the brahmins? If you read my post, I had implied brahmins supporting the British agenda could have done it. No problem. I see you don't see the value of rituals but that is fine. I do see the value of it and feel brahmins should not forsake them.

 

[happyhindu]

Firstly, I am slowly coming to the conclusion that you have a high degree of bias against the Sankara mutts.

I repeat - no bias, i have nothing personal to gain. Am just pointing out discrepencies in the claims made. Is that wrong? Why wud call that a bias?

The reason is your comments in the last paragraph which has no connection with the stuff we are discussing now. To answer that first, whether the hundreds of Acharyas have produced enough literature or not is something that you can answer better than me due to your research oriented approach.

Yes sir it does have connection. If they have not produced literature, can it not be said that they:

a) Have not been delving into the scriptures sufficiently to be able to guide the masses, based on the shastras.

b) That they are not able to accept research by universities and historians with regard to the shastras; and are unable to accept the failings side (like interpolations side) of the shastras.

To me, I care less. The very fact that these mutts have continued to exist from the times of Adi Shankara with a continuous succession of Acharyas means something, may be not to you. This tradition is not measured in terms of literary output they produce. The Acharyas are not professors in a university whose professorship depends on the number of journals they produce. The very fact these Acharyas are living provide succor to the people who seek them.

Adi Shankara did not establish the Kanchi mutt. He established only 4 mutts. The 5th mutt (Kanchi)'s antecedents have been well documented by historians.

You can also read the book Sankara Digvijayam published by Ramakrishna Math.

The history of Kanchi Mutt claims that Adi Shankara was born in 509 BC: : kamakoti.org

This claim is not only refuted by historians but also by the Shringeri Mutt. Shringeri mutt says Adi Shankara was born in 788 AD: history

Right from the birth to the samadhi details, Kanchi mutt's claims do not tally with those of the other 4 shankra mutts.

Whenever i say, Shankara-Mutts, i always mean 'kanchi mutt' bcoz it came to exercise some powers on other mutts.

I have nothing against the other 4 mutts established by Adi Shankara. I have the highest regard for the Shringeri peetham for their philanthropic work. The only seer i have great regard for in the Kanchi mutt is Jayendra Swami.

Kanchi mutt details are best left to historians. If i am allowed to use a strong word, then i wud call the whole case "murky". And no, i am not surprised that interpolations can exist.

I don't know if you believe in the concept of poojas. The Chandramoulisvara pooja is performed everyday by these Acharyas from the times of Adi Sankara. Apart from that the mutts are involved in a variety of other dharmic activities. To equate them to research producing bhasyam in lines with scientists and medicos is a bit shocking to me.

Why shd the expectation of producing literature be shocking? Adi Shankara was able to convert others because of his literary prowess. Poojas are performed everyday elsewhere too. Other organizations are involved in dharmic activities too. What is kanchi Mutt doing in terms of guiding masses, esp based on the shastras?

Your next comment is even more strange. Are you equating output (in terms of research) with leadership? How have you concluded they have not provided proper leadership and guidance to the masses? Let me know?

Yes i consider literary ability as one of the key things to providing proper leadership. Everything that the vatican came to be, was because of church leaders who produced suitable literary works.

Except Jayendra Swami and the Shringeri peetham, is anyone else in the shankara mutts involved in philanthropic works? In what ways have all the 5 mutts guided people based on shastras? And no i am not talking of guidance to brahmins alone.

1. It is generally accepted that the Vedas and Upanishads speak noble truths, are not discriminatory against anything whether castes or women. (hope we agree on this)

Yes, we do. And that's because Vedas or Upanishad do not talk about castes (except verses that stand out like the 'odd man out' in some upanishads like chandogya).

2. You and me both agree that the shastras say good things and bad things. From your reply above, I infer that the discriminatory verses (whether denigrating women or exalted status to brahmins) are interpolations (ie) added later.

That's what we think. And it does not matter to anyone.

What matter most is not only what historians and scholars think but also what the acharyas of the mutts think.

3. The Paramacharya says that the Smritis derive their authority from the Srutis and cannot be otherwise.

On what basis?

4. Point 3 further indicates then that the Smiritis cannot be discriminatory (if points 1 and 2 are true)

How? I have already provided verses that show how shudras shd be treated in this very thread. I also provided verses from Manusmrithi on how women are to be treated. Funny that you do not find them discriminatory..

Ok, now lets say i create verses like these:

a) "A brahmin shall use only the items used by Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras"
b) "The Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras shall not drink water offered by a brahmin, for the most despicable of all castes is the brahmin"

Atleast now are you able see the discriminatory part (why don't you just substitute the word "brahmin" whereever "shudra" or "women" have been mentioned).

5. This further leads to the conclusions that the discriminatory interpolations have to be discarded. (You say yourself that the Kanchi Mutt do not acknowledge the interpolations).

I said the Kanchi Mutt does not acknowledge interpolations in the sense that they do not seem to agree (or accept) that there are interpolations in the first place. Can you ask them if they are considering the smrithis as 'unchangable" or "changable"?

6. The Mutt need not specifically say which part of the dharmasastra needs to be followed or not because their position regarding this is crystal clear. (by saying the Smrtis are derived from the non-discriminatory Srutis).

Nope, sorry. They have to acknowledge the discriminatory parts of the smrithis; and clarify which is to be followed and which is not. Or they must not propagate the smrithis in the first place. They certainly owe an explanation to the rest of the hindus, esp to all women and to the shudras.

7. This has also got to be tied to the other teachings, lectures and discourses of the Paramacharya. There is not a single place where he advocates discrimination. He also says as brahmins seem to be following the mutt mostly they will get the message of his teachings.

So, does that mean brahmins who are following the mutt should follow smrithis that say a women and shudras are to treated badly? Paramacharya's articles are not clear and direct. They are ambigous.

Going back to your point b.) brahmins did not create them for self-benefit. Can you show me where the Acharya or the mutt says this?

Its here: Brahmins are not a Privileged Caste from the Chapter "Varna Dharma For Universal Well-Being", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org: Am reproducing the parts:

It is alleged that Brahmins created the dharmasastras for their own benefit. ..

(ps: please also let me know which dharmashastra says this):

here is also proof of the impartiality of the dharmasastras in that the Brahmin who is expected to be proficient in all the arts and all branches of learning can only give instruction in them but cannot take up any for his livelihood however lucrative it be..

If a brahmin cannot take to other livelihoods, does that automatically make the dharmashastras "impartial"? How? How come there is no mention of how shudras and women are to be treated -- does that sound "good" and "impartial" to the acharya? Moreover the acharya also says this: http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap9.htm

The moral and ethical ordinances in other religions are applicable to all their followers. In Hinduism too there is a code of conduct meant for all varnas and all jatis. But in addition to this, there are separate dharmas for jatis with different vocations. There is no intermingling of these vocations and their corresponding dharmas. This fact is central to Hinduism and to its eternal character.

Does this mean that the acharya expects brahmins to continue to ill-treat shudras and women? Again, i repeat, the articles are nothing but ambiguous and unclear. Is it not possible for the current acharyas to publish clarifications - on which parts of the smrithis are to be followed?

To me, if the Mutt is rejecting the interpolations it is automatic that the people responsible for the interpolations are also rejected. My point is these people could be brahmins or non-brahmins. Just because the clauses are loaded against non-brahmins do not mean they were created by brahmins only. If the purpose is disinformation to create animosity, anything becomes fair game. Fanatical elements don't come with a caste name.

Yes, its possible that the interpolations were not created by brahmins. If so, then why did the brahmins in the colonial time expect to control social hierarchial structures? Why did they not say those discriminatory parts are interpolations? Why are they still not saying so? And why did they not create an all-inclusive society? Why do they still insist of keeping jaatis segregated by birth?

Going back to your point no. c.) Smrithis are valid for all times. My question is why they should not be? If we all agree to discard the discriminatory clauses then what is left can be an excellent guide to how lead a life in modern times. Just looking at the 10 yamas and niyamas in the Upanishads, we can see they are valid for all times.

Yes, but first the discriminatory parts need to be addressed. Second, to show that they are putting non-discrimination into practice, the mutts need to take in students across all strata.

I don't know where I gave the impression that I am supporting the brahmins? If you read my post, I had implied brahmins supporting the British agenda could have done it. No problem. I see you don't see the value of rituals but that is fine. I do see the value of it and feel brahmins should not forsake them.

I already mentioned my stand in a previous post. For me, rituals are valid as long as i live in the grihasta life and do not remain valid upon sanyasam. But then, that's me. It has nothing to do others.

regards.

 

[anandb]

Dear Shri. Nara,

...

Dear Sapthajihva, Greetings!

I clearly stated we agreed to end the discussion by mutual consent. I was only saying that my question remains unanswered and it still does. Let me restate that question:

What good does the varna/caste system provide that cannot be had otherwise?​

Irrespective of the reason why Varna system exists, please let me know what good it does to people, especially those who are at the bottom.

Nobody has answered this question, yet.

Happy New Year!

WARNING: LONG POST

I will start by attempting this. Yesterday while I was driving back to work was day dreaming about this. If we look at any society in any country we see four main divisions in labor or occupation. Whether Hindu or Islamic or Christian we have the clergy (in charge of matters spiritual and scriptural) equivalent to the brahmin caste. Second is the security apparatus comprising of army, navy, airforce, police and so on equivalent to the Kshatriyas. Third is the trading community (includes businessmen and agriculturists) equivalent to Vashyas. Fourth is all community services (includes cleaners, janitors, drivers, maids, delivery boys) equivalent to the Shudras. Even today we can see every society comprising the above category of people. You take away one category and the perfect balance is gone. Today it would seem like the people doing community services are menial but just imagine if these guys go on strike. A soldier who is to fight a war defending his country will be doing his laundry at home. This was perfectly understood in those times so no job would be looked down.

In fact it was easier for the person from the Sudra community to achieve his karma palan easily because all he had to do was just perform his services as per dharma while the other three had to perform religious things apart from their allotted services. I have read actually the brahmins were the worst hit (contrary to popular opinion) because they had to perform all their sanskaras and had to be fed by others. There was no scope for jealousy because all the varnas came with advantages and disadvantages. The advantages were the brahmins were supported by the other because they performed all the rituals and yagnas and maintained the scriptures, the Kshatriyas got fame and glory through their valor which was important for them, the Vaishyas could live lavishly due to trade while the Sudras were also also taken care of by the state due to the services they were rendering. The disadvantages were the brahmin cannot keep anything for himself or accumulate riches, the Kshatriya could lose his life, the Vaishya can go bankrupt while the Sudra is stuck with menial jobs. The main thing was everyone understood the territory they were operating within and what came with it so there was no jealousy about the other but just an emphasis on doing the karma allotted to them.

There were no thousands of castes we find today (I read that most of the castes came forth during the Islamic/British rule). Under exceptional circumstances, we do find inter change of varna duties as in the case of Mahabharata or the thousands of literary works attempted by non-brahmins. In fact these works would not have survived if they were discouraged. In fact old age afflicts everyone irrespective of caste and even the other three varnas undergo the varnashrama stages.

To cut this long story short, I feel this system can be applied even today at least in India. I am not advocating the thousands of jatis but just the four basic varnas. The main criticism I can expect is it stifles creativity, lateral mobility of labour thereby denying opportunities and so on. Let us see the present state of affairs. It has become an absolute rat race out there with no contentment whatsoever among people. In other words there is always this inner urge to achieve the next level materialistically and this goes on. Today one has a 3G i-phone and tomorrow it is 4G and you want to have that as well. The problem is science is definitely making everyone materialistically comfortable but at a great environmental cost. The inner world is neglected at the cost of the outer world. Intellect is ruling wholly at the cost of Intuition. I think mankind needs to return back to basics in terms of thinking.

What we need today is not faster mobile phones or computers , higher resolution LCDs or fuel guzzling autos but increasing agricultural production not through GM, saving trees, improving health and reducing pollution. Even today if the varna system is applied it can mean living within the means, living with the environment and actually living with others.

I think a lot of sacrifices are called. To start with this may sound funny but imagination needs a starting point as well. Firstly, all the brahmins return to their brahminical roots meaning learning the Vedas, Veda adhyanam, interpretation of the scriptures, doing poojas and ceremonies for other varnas and also live with state support. So they cannot indulge in other activities. This means that brahmins currently doing military work or running businesses chuck them and return to their roots. This will probably open up a few million other jobs currently held by brahmins. If the non-brahmins can identify themselves specifically as belonging to the other varnas then take up the vocation suitable to that varna otherwise the state makes the allocation in a democratic way. Now for the final part which I know I will be trampled upon. The working women should chuck the jobs they are holding and start managing the households. This may seem to be dirty but I can tell from personal experience that managing a household is not easy. My wife does not work and I actually envy her for everything - right from cooking, having time to do pooja, bringing up kids, maintaining the home and the household budget plus going out with friends and generally having a good quality time happily which is what life is all about. Now we find this increasing trend of women not able to manage both fronts - career and household and returning to do just one full time. All these women chucking their jobs will probably create a few more million jobs on the job front. The key word is "contentment". You sign up if you are willing to scale down your life materialistically but enriching it in other ways. You may ask why return to the Varna system to do this? I think it is possible only through that. If everything is open to everyone to grab it leads to unhealthy competition. So the word "contentment" is not there. What do you think, Shri. Nara?

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

I repeat - no bias, i have nothing personal to gain. Am just pointing out discrepencies in the claims made. Is that wrong? Why wud call that a bias?

Yes sir it does have connection. If they have not produced literature, can it not be said that they:

a) Have not been delving into the scriptures sufficiently to be able to guide the masses, based on the shastras.

b) That they are not able to accept research by universities and historians with regard to the shastras; and are unable to accept the failings side (like interpolations side) of the shastras.

Adi Shankara did not establish the Kanchi mutt. He established only 4 mutts. The 5th mutt (Kanchi)'s antecedents have been well documented by historians.

You can also read the book Sankara Digvijayam published by Ramakrishna Math.

The history of Kanchi Mutt claims that Adi Shankara was born in 509 BC: : kamakoti.org

This claim is not only refuted by historians but also by the Shringeri Mutt. Shringeri mutt says Adi Shankara was born in 788 AD: history

Right from the birth to the samadhi details, Kanchi mutt's claims do not tally with those of the other 4 shankra mutts.

Whenever i say, Shankara-Mutts, i always mean 'kanchi mutt' bcoz it came to exercise some powers on other mutts.

I have nothing against the other 4 mutts established by Adi Shankara. I have the highest regard for the Shringeri peetham for their philanthropic work. The only seer i have great regard for in the Kanchi mutt is Jayendra Swami.

Kanchi mutt details are best left to historians. If i am allowed to use a strong word, then i wud call the whole case "murky". And no, i am not surprised that interpolations can exist.

Why shd the expectation of producing literature be shocking? Adi Shankara was able to convert others because of his literary prowess. Poojas are performed everyday elsewhere too. Other organizations are involved in dharmic activities too. What is kanchi Mutt doing in terms of guiding masses, esp based on the shastras?

Yes i consider literary ability as one of the key things to providing proper leadership. Everything that the vatican came to be, was because of church leaders who produced suitable literary works.

Except Jayendra Swami and the Shringeri peetham, is anyone else in the shankara mutts involved in philanthropic works? In what ways have all the 5 mutts guided people based on shastras? And no i am not talking of guidance to brahmins alone.

Yes, we do. And that's because Vedas or Upanishad do not talk about castes (except verses that stand out like the 'odd man out' in some upanishads like chandogya).

That's what we think. And it does not matter to anyone.

What matter most is not only what historians and scholars think but also what the acharyas of the mutts think.

On what basis?

How? I have already provided verses that show how shudras shd be treated in this very thread. I also provided verses from Manusmrithi on how women are to be treated. Funny that you do not find them discriminatory..

Ok, now lets say i create verses like these:

a) "A brahmin shall use only the items used by Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras"
b) "The Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras shall not drink water offered by a brahmin, for the most despicable of all castes is the brahmin"

Atleast now are you able see the discriminatory part (why don't you just substitute the word "brahmin" whereever "shudra" or "women" have been mentioned).

I said the Kanchi Mutt does not acknowledge interpolations in the sense that they do not seem to agree (or accept) that there are interpolations in the first place. Can you ask them if they are considering the smrithis as 'unchangable" or "changable"?

Nope, sorry. They have to acknowledge the discriminatory parts of the smrithis; and clarify which is to be followed and which is not. Or they must not propagate the smrithis in the first place.

So, does that mean brahmins who are following the mutt should follow smrithis that say a women and shudras are to treated badly? Paramacharya's articles are not clear and direct. They are ambigous.

Its here: Brahmins are not a Privileged Caste from the Chapter "Varna Dharma For Universal Well-Being", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org: Am reproducing the parts:
(ps: please also let me know which dharmashastra says this):
If a brahmin cannot take to other livelihoods, does that automatically make the dharmashastras "impartial"? How? How come there is no mention of how shudras and women are to be treated -- does that sound "good" and "impartial" to the acharya? Moreover the acharya also says this: The Eternal Religion from the Chapter "Varna Dharma For Universal Well-Being", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org:

Does this mean that the acharya expects brahmins to continue to ill-treat shudras and women? Again, i repeat, the articles are nothing but ambiguous and unclear. Is it not possible for the current acharyas to publish clarifications - on what parts of the smrithis are to be followed?

Yes, its possible that the interpolations were not created by brahmins. Then why did the brahmins in the colonial time expect to control social hierarchial structures? Why did they not say those discriminatory parts are interpolations? Why are they still not saying so? And why did they not create an all-inclusive society?

Yes, but first the discriminatory parts need to be addressed. Second, to show that they are putting non-discrimination into practice, the mutts need to take in students across all strata.

I already mentioned my stand in a previous post. For me, rituals are valid as long as i live in the grihasta life and do not remain valid upon sanyasam. But then, that's me. It has nothing to do others.

regards.

This reminds me of what the sage said. "You can wake up a person who is sleeping but not someone who is pretending to sleep". I know you will say this applies to me as well. Anyway I rest my case here as I have said whatever I wanted to say.

thanks

 

[happyhindu]

This reminds me of what the sage said. "You can wake up a person who is sleeping but not someone who is pretending to sleep". I know you will say this applies to me as well. Anyway I rest my case here as I have said whatever I wanted to say.

thanks

that's no way to end a conversation anand.

you asked me questions and i have spent 30+ min giving you an answer.

now i have asked you questions in my post above. i request you to answer them.

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

that's no way to end a conversation anand.

you asked me questions and i have spent 30+ min giving you an answer.

now i have asked you questions in my post above. i request you to answer them.

As I said, I have said whatever I wanted to say and I stand by what I say. In my opinion I have clearly laid out my logic. Honestly I can do no more than that because I feel I will just be repeating myself which is just sheer waste of all our time. I sincerely appreciate the time spent on this by you.

Thanks

 

[happyhindu]

As I said, I have said whatever I wanted to say and I stand by what I say. In my opinion I have clearly laid out my logic. Honestly I can do no more than that because I feel I will just be repeating myself which is just sheer waste of all our time. I sincerely appreciate the time spent on this by you.

Thanks

Your logic and my logic is grossly insufficient Anand.

To me, you are beating a hasty retreat. And more so, with a proverb like "You can wake up a person who is sleeping but not someone who is pretending to sleep" and "sheer waste of time".

Until this time, were we not wasting time? Why only now suddenly you want to go away without giving an answer?

You logic is that since Paramacharya has said Smrithis are non-discriminatory, therefore they do not discriminate.

I am providing these verses all over again and asking you very clearly, are they not discriminatory ?

Manu Smrithi: The Laws of Manu V
147. By a girl, by a young woman, or even by an aged one, nothing must be done independently, even in her own house.

148. In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a woman must never be independent.

Manu Smrithi: The Laws of Manu VII

149. At the time of consultation let him ("him" refers to a king) cause to be removed idiots, the dumb, the blind, and the deaf, animals, very aged men, women, barbarians, the sick, and those deficient in limbs.

Chapter 9:
2. Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one's control.

3. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence.

Apastamba's dharmasutra: APASTAMBA PRASNA I, PATALA 1, KHANDA, 1.

4. (There are) four castes--Brâhmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sûdras.
5. Amongst these, each preceding (caste) is superior by birth to the one following.

Gautama's dharmashastra: http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/hinduism/dharma/gautama1.asp

[unable to copy-paste the verses]

1) Chapter 9 verse 11 says that a dwija must not drink water offered by a shudra or an impure man.

2) Chapter 10, verse 58 says a shudra has to use the cast-offs (shoes, umbrellas, mats ) of the higher castes.

3) Chapter 12, verse 4 says if a shudra listens to the vedas, his ears shall be filled with molten tin or lac.

4) Chapter 12, verse 5 says if a shudra recites the vedas, his tongue will be cut off.

5) Chapter 12, verse 6 says if a shudra remembers the vedas, his body shall be split in twain.

6) Please also read the whole Chapter 12.

And on what basis does Paramacharya endorse the smrithis for everyone to follow their own codes of conduct ? Does that mean a brahmin must treat shudras and women in the above manner? Is it not discriminatory?

I also repeat this:
The Kanchi mutt has to acknowledge the discriminatory parts of the smrithis; and clarify which is to be followed in the present times and which is not. Or they must not propagate the smrithis in the first place. They certainly owe an explanation to the rest of the hindus, esp to all women and to the shudras.

Regards.

 

[sapthajihva]

Shri Nara, wish you and your family a happy new year...

....

What good does the varna/caste system provide that cannot be had otherwise?​

Irrespective of the reason why Varna system exists, please let me know what good it does to people, especially those who are at the bottom.

Nobody has answered this question, yet.

Happy New Year!

IMO,

The premises:

• The varna has two main premises - karma and reincarnation. As you already know about this, I need not explain the process.
• The one and only aim of a jivathma is Moksham.

The usage:

• Varna helps to identify the prarabdham for the current birth.
• To follow the karmas prescribed for the varna so that the jivathma is elevated.
• As a result to maintain Dharma - both individual and societal.
• Apart from karmas, to engage in activities/profession that befits their varna.
• It creates an identity so that varna sankara does not happen.
• To ensure that the teachings of the vedhas are not denigrated or ignored.
• The more 'loukeeka' benefits are - distinct behavioural and living habits are identified easily.
• And lastly, it is the way things are. Disowing it may give you a feeling of 'swathanthram', but it is transient.

Hope this answers your query!

Regards,

 

[pvraman]

Dear Smt HH Ji

You have in your thread asked to replace Shudras & Women with Brahmana, where ever the punishments are described. You are keeping the present day sudhras & Brahmins and ladies into your consideration when you want to switch the words.
You have not considered the duties defined for each varna and the punishments defined when one slips off from his defined duties. There is an elaborate definition for the duties and through out the MS, I see the duties are linked with the status for all. I also fail to understand, why the ancient Brahmanas should rewrite MS to punish Women (!) & Shudras, when they live at the mercy of other 3 varnas?. It may be because Shudras were more shrewd and clever than Kshatrias and Vysyas, thats why its cooked up in the MS to punish exclusively shudras & women (?! - i dont know, but may be more shrewd?). In the same Manu we are seeing Brahmanas also attaining shudra status, when he fail to perform his duties.

Why when the Brahmanas liberally, cooked up the MS as today's historians happily do, remove those lines?. Why Brahmins were punished more severely than others for certain crimes. Why they did not remove those lines too?.

Coming back to the punishment, There is no question after 5th BC that the MS was followed word for word. (from the beginning of Buddism, islam & Christian invasions, we are only free from 1947,) . I think it is like today's punishments, we are not hanging even the terrorists and treating them with Biryanies. I still feel that, they are the doers and very much a part of the society in the ancient times. There is no recognition of the work of labor class not only in ancient times, but even in today's time. Why in any GOOD COUNTRY, only bankers, businessmen & software people get more perks and comforts than cleaners painters construction workers etc etc

The Definition of Varna and punishments are irrelevant today.

Regards

 

[Nara]

The premises:

• The varna has two main premises - karma and reincarnation. As you already know about this, I need not explain the process.
• The one and only aim of a jivathma is Moksham.

Dear Sapthajihva,

So, any good that varna system could offer depends upon a narrow premise of athma, reincarnation, and moksham. It has no benefit that everyone can accept without having to buy into this set of assumptions that are believed to be true only upon faith.

In other words, for people without such faith, the varna system offers nothing but privilage to some and servitude to others.

Thank you, and a very happy New Year to you and to your family as well, may you, and all, live long and prosper....

Let happiness and love abound

 

[pvraman]

Dear Sri Nara Sir,

The varnashrama dharma & caste system has helped the people at the bottom much better than in those countries with one language and one culture. Because of the caste system, they get good representation in the govt and the problems are highlighted. People are much aware of their உரிமைகள் than their கடமைகள். Our Political system has become so considerate that even to cast ones vote, parties are giving TVs, 1Rp/kg rice, and 2000 Rs / Vote. In this way, Muslim & Christian conversions could not be so fast in converting.

There is a good possibility, if there is no caste, all the political parties will be showering benefits to Christians and Muslims for their Chunk of votes.

Caste இல்லாத பல countries are in a very bad position than us. Poverty is there everywhere. உழவர்களும், manual labors are not getting the proper reward, only middleman & traders are getting the benefits.

Regards

 

[sapthajihva]

Hello Shri Nara,

So, any good that varna system could offer depends upon a narrow premise of athma, reincarnation, and moksham. It has no benefit that everyone can accept without having to buy into this set of assumptions that are believed to be true only upon faith.

In other words, for people without such faith, the varna system offers nothing but privilage to some and servitude to others.
..............

If I indiscriminately put a 'why?' to any reasoning, it will all dilute into an ultimate belief/faith - whether it be goodness, love or moksham.:eyebrows:

In this view, everything is narrow, going by your definition.

Please dont 'squint your mind' to define anything - only a keyhole space is left then, for you to evaluate things.

Karanam, Kartha, Athma and Prapanjam are explained logically in the Vedhas. I believe the subject of Athma was broached in another thread between us.

We all stop somewhere, isn't it... You stopped buying into something, and suddenly that becomes narrow to you. Good logic!

Thanks and Best Regards,

 

[Nara]

In this view, everything is narrow, going by your definition.

Dear Sapthajihva, if the adjective "narrow" is objectionable, I will withdraw it.

The problem with your answer is, it makes sense only within the premise you stated, which not even all Hindus accept as authentic. Your exchanges with HH shows this fact.

Further, all the benefits, such as moksham etc. are promised after death. Nothing for this current life, which is the only life we are sure of. The only guarantee of life after death and the promised benefits, is Vedas. Why should Vedas be believed, because a bunch of Brahmins with a vested interest say so. Why should any reasonable person suspect a con game here?

Therefore, there is absolutely no good in this life, the only one that one can be surely of, that cannot be had but for the varna/caste system.

Best wishes...

 

[renuka]

Dear Naraji,

The Vedas is only a guide.
Didnt Lord Krishna tell to Arjuna to rise above the Vedas?
The Vedas is universal and not a monopoly of anyone sect in this world.
Its essense is for everyone to drink.
All we need is a cup.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Smt HH Ji

You have in your thread asked to replace Shudras & Women with Brahmana, where ever the punishments are described. You are keeping the present day sudhras & Brahmins and ladies into your consideration when you want to switch the words.
You have not considered the duties defined for each varna and the punishments defined when one slips off from his defined duties. There is an elaborate definition for the duties and through out the MS, I see the duties are linked with the status for all. I also fail to understand, why the ancient Brahmanas should rewrite MS to punish Women (!) & Shudras, when they live at the mercy of other 3 varnas?. It may be because Shudras were more shrewd and clever than Kshatrias and Vysyas, thats why its cooked up in the MS to punish exclusively shudras & women (?! - i dont know, but may be more shrewd?). In the same Manu we are seeing Brahmanas also attaining shudra status, when he fail to perform his duties.

Why when the Brahmanas liberally, cooked up the MS as today's historians happily do, remove those lines?. Why Brahmins were punished more severely than others for certain crimes. Why they did not remove those lines too?.

Coming back to the punishment, There is no question after 5th BC that the MS was followed word for word. (from the beginning of Buddism, islam & Christian invasions, we are only free from 1947,) . I think it is like today's punishments, we are not hanging even the terrorists and treating them with Biryanies. I still feel that, they are the doers and very much a part of the society in the ancient times. There is no recognition of the work of labor class not only in ancient times, but even in today's time. Why in any GOOD COUNTRY, only bankers, businessmen & software people get more perks and comforts than cleaners painters construction workers etc etc

The Definition of Varna and punishments are irrelevant today.

Regards

Then why is the Kanchi mutt propagating smrithis?
And why do the acharyas define who are the various varnas of today?

Paramacharya not only mentions the shudra castes, but also mentions that each caste and varna is to follow their dharma and own codes of conduct. And also mentions that each caste has been following their own dharmas for 'thousands of years'.

If the instructions given to iyers is such, then i wish to ask the iyers these questions:

a) On what basis are you conducting rituals for Mudaliyar, Naicker, Reddy, Pillais, Gounder and Padayachi (Vanniar) communities ?

b) Why are you guys accepting dakshina from these communites till date?

c) In the past why did the Kanchi mutt accept donations, including land, from these castes?

d) Did Paramacharya conveniently overlook the fact that quite a few people who patronized kanchi mutt in the past were balijas using the title chetty / chettiar? (since there is no mention of chettiar in his list of shudras).

e) Did anyone clarify from Paramacharya whether he considered the Kallars and Thevars as kshatriyas; or Nagarathars as vaishyas? Did anyone not point out to Paramacharya that these communities do not fit the definition of 'vedic kshatriyas' and 'vedic vaishyas' (or atleast as defined by the smrithis as ppl following certain requirements / rituals)?

f) On what basis did Paramacharya presume that castes such as mudaliyars, naickers, pillais, gounders, existed in the past? Is there any text mentioning the presence of these "castes" even 1000 years back?

g) Did not anyone let Paramacharya know that every caste is proven to be made up of varied stocks, and also vary regionally?

i) Did paramacharya think that castes like Iyer and Iyengar actually existed in 500BC (when the dharmashastras began to be written)? Why does he mention these castes as 'brahmin castes' and go on to say that brahmin practices have existed for "thousands of years" ?
[Is that the reason why some self-deluded smarthas think that they or their caste has been in existence for 'thousands and thousands of years'?]

j) Did paramacharya overlook the fact that brahmins are as mixed as any other caste? On what basis does he claim there was no-intermingling of occupations?
[Is this the basis for those self-deluded smarthas to think that they are "pure"]

k) Did Paramacharya not know about soldiers being made into menial workers and about how women were violated during the muslim ransacking of this land and its temples.

l) Did anyone clarify from Paramacharya whether the 'brahmana' of the smrithis refers to monks or to the present day priests?

m) Did anyone ask Paramacharya whether Yadavas are kshatriya or vaishya, since Manusmrithi clearly mentions cattle-herding as a profession of the vaishyas, not kshatriyas.

n) Manusmrithi also mentions farming as a profession of Vaishyas, not shudras. On what basis did Paramacharya then mention farming communities such as Kapus and Padayachis as shudras?

0) Did anyone ask Paramacharya why there are so many self-contradictory verses within one smrithi, wrt to women?

p) Did anyone ask Paramacharya which smrithi is to be followed, since 2 different smrithis can contradict one another?

q) Manusmrithi allows a brahmin to take up other professions, but Paramacharya did not endorse brahmins taking to other professions. So which Smrithi was Paramacharya following? Gautama Smrithi ?

r) Did anyone ask Paramacharya how come manusmrithi allows brahmins kill an animal, as well as consume meat? He prohibitted it, giving the 'explanation' of yugas. But did not anyone tell paramacharya that Manusmrithi was not written in some different yuga, but was written less than 2K years ago?

s) Manusmrithi says anyone who knowingly eats onions, garlic, mushrooms, etc becomes an outcaste. So did anyone ask Paramacharya, if every brahmin became an outcaste like that, boz of his diet, then how many people remain brahmins today?


And as for the rest of your post, PVR, you make assumptions that brahmins were punished more severely, etc and you always mention only one smrithi (Manusmrithi). Therefore i am attaching a copy of the Manusmrithi. Please read it before you comment. If you can send me a pm with your email address, i can email to you a sanskrit copy of 18 major smrithis.

No matter what you say PVR, so many smrithis mentioning discriminatory things explicitely, and favouring brahmins to the maximum, cannot be overlooked as the non-handiwork of brahmins. Perhaps that is the reason why the general masses have this image of brahmins as scheming, wily people, for no fault of present-day brahmins.

A good many smrithis discriminate against Chandalas the most, as the most despicable of all castes. Those poor domari people must have been the most disliked of all professions in the past - all for carrying dead bodies and cleaning sewers.

If smrithis are to be followed today too, does that mean we treat the chandalas in the same crass way today. Today the law is different. They go to school, study.

If we were to apply those mullah-type smrithi laws today, should we prevent the dalits, shudras and women from getting an education and should we pour lac / tin / lead into their ears for listening to loudspeakers blasting mantras ?

On what basis is the Kanchi mutt propgating the smrithis, without taking the present era into consideration? They do owe an explanation - about what they expect people to follow in today's times. Or they should not propagate smrithis. Nor can they expect ppl to go back to living in some ancient times like wahhabis. Looks like this is the place from all the angst about 'secularism' is coming...


Regards.

[Sorry, am not able to attach the sanskrit copy of manusmrithi with english translation. You can download it from here: Manu Smriti - Sanskrit Text With English Translation ]

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Naraji,

The Vedas is only a guide.
Didnt Lord Krishna tell to Arjuna to rise above the Vedas?
The Vedas is universal and not a monopoly of anyone sect in this world.
Its essense is for everyone to drink.
All we need is a cup.

renu,

the discussion is about smrithis.

obviously smrithis are different from vedas.

and i do wonder on what basis does anyone claim that law-codes in smrithis are derived / based on the vedas.

to have a heart of acceptance, when one does not even need vedas, wonder how ppl can give all sorts of explanations on smrithis.

 

[renuka]

Dear all, Read this please, even though not related to this thread but i put it here becos this thread is Hot.

Aims and ideals of Neohumanist Education:

• To develop the full potential of each child: physical, mental and spiritual
• To awaken a thirst for knowledge and love of learning
• To equip students with academic and other skills necessary for higher education
• To facilitate personal growth in areas such as morality, integrity, self-confidence, self-discipline and cooperation
• To develop physical well-being and mental capabilities through yoga and concentration techniques, sports and play
• To develop a sense of aesthetics and appreciation of culture through drama, dance, music and art
• To encourage students to become active and responsible members of society
• To promote an awareness of ecology in its broadest sense (i.e. the realization of the inter-relatedness of all things) and to encourage respect and care for all living beings
• To encourage a universal outlook, free from discrimination based on religion, race, creed or gender
• To recognize the importance of teachers and parents in setting an example


Some general principles of the Neohumanist Education curriculum:

1. Based on the concept of universalism
• all people are children of the one God
• there is a unity in all creation
• cultivation of love for God and His entire creation (human beings, animals and plants)
• there should be no discrimination on the basis of race, religion, nationality, etc.
• universal outlook – the curriculum is global in perspective and regional in application

2. Holistic approach
• the human personality is multifaceted
• balanced development of the child's potentiality should be on all levels of existence; physical, mental and spiritual
3. Morality and ethical values are stressed
• development of moral integrity is vital to the well-being of the individual and society as a whole
4. Education must awaken a thirst for knowledge in the child's mind
• when learning is joyful, children learn rapidly and thoroughly
• younger children learn through play, stories and songs
• older children learn through experiential projects and problem-solving exercises
• one who is learned is one who has read a lot, understood it, remembered it and applied it.
5. Emphasis is given to applied skills, in addition to theoretical knowledge
6. All teaching must be based on factuality
• free from the influence of political or other propaganda
7. All qualities of mind are to be developed
• discipline, self-reliance, initiative, character, sweet disposition
• rationality, creative intellect, awakened conscience
• self-knowledge
8. Culture, language and heritage
• children are encouraged to learn and preserve their local culture and language
• at the same time they become familiarised with the multicultural world environment
• in this way the native culture is maintained in the midst of globalization
9. Development of an expanded social consciousness
• starts with self-confidence and esteem
• leads to a sense of responsibility
• towards social justice, security and peace
10. Benevolent outlook and social service
• inculcation of the spirit of selfless service to others
• service to humanity is service to God
• for the welfare and happiness of all


Some basics of the Neohumanist Education curriculum:

1. Morality is of fundamental importance, and includes the development of moral principles such as:
• integrity of character
• trustworthiness
• benevolent outlook
• simplicity of life
• magnanimity of mind
2. Languages
• the child's mother tongue is its most precious means of expression
• as such the use of mother tongue is encouraged
• the lingua franca of the world, in addition to other useful languages, is also taught
3. Development of arts, science and technology
• art should be for the inspiration and upliftment of humanity (not just "art for art's sake")
• science and technology are beneficial to humanity if used properly
• children are encouraged to develop their latent skills and aptitude in all these fields
4. Aesthetics and creativity
• children should not only learn established facts and methods
• they should also develop a sense of aesthetics and creative expression
• creativity of thought allows for the development of new ideas and techniques, beneficial for individual and collective social progress
5. Physical education and practical life skills
• to equip the child with the skills needed to deal with the physical world
• physical education includes sensorimoter development through sports, exercise and yoga
• practical life skills include health and hygiene, cooking, gardening, self-defense and survival training
6. Sense of human history and society
• history is not only inspiring, but gives valuable lessons in human nature and psychology
• social studies gives an awareness of social problems and equips the child with the skills to deal with these problems
• children should feel inspired to work for social justice and upliftment
7. Natural history and ecology
• ecologically sound principles are explored from an early age
• sense of love for nature is cultivated
• leads to ecological awareness and care for the environment
8. Intuition and wisdom
• children are instilled with a sense of positivity and optimism
• this leads to a natural curiosity about the wonder of the universe
• a basis is built for the contemplation of our relationship with God, others and the universe as a whole
• the child gradually gains the ability to realize its purpose in life and act upon it


Qualities of teachers The role of teachers in our society is of paramount importance, as it is the young children who will be the leaders of tomorrow. Children learn very quickly, and everything is easily assimilated by their inquisitive and absorbent minds. As such, the exemplary role of educators is of vital importance, as they themselves are setting the example for the children. The necessary qualities of any teacher are:
• an innate love and compassion for all humanity
• a genuine love and affection for children
• moral integrity and righteousness
• dedication to the all-round development of the child
• self-restraint of behaviour and temper
• decency of personal behaviour
• discipline, punctuality and dutifulness
• strong character
• inspiring personality
• leadership ability
• good judgement and balanced mind
• academically qualified
• able to conduct a cooperative and communicative relationship with the parents
• free from the influence of political or other vested interests
• possessing a spirit of selfless service to the society
• teaching by personal behaviour and example


Download Gurukula Network, the newsletter of Neohumanist schools


Have you got what it takes?
Email service at anandamarga.org to volunteer.

​

​

Ananda Marga – "Path of Bliss"
Copyright © 2006 Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha
All rights reserved

All uncredited quotes by Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (Shrii Shrii Anandamurti)