Is the caste system weakness of Hinduism?

[happyhindu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Sri. Meerkat/RR,


Wow, a misdirected indignation.
I was referring to the venerable member who has over 2000 posts to his credit and has ostensibly quit the forum and entreaties are flying around to bring him back. I stand by the phrase "sulking child".
Surprising.
It is the attitude of that venerable member and some of his ilk who seek to run down even what remain little precious within the brahmin community, who all Saidevo referred as ones "abundantly opiniated" in the forum Agraharams. Also it the same venerable member who practically calls for dissolution of the brahmin community as he believes no good can be achieved for hinduism or for humanity with the legacy of brahminhood. You should be discerning enough to know where the solvent is.

Yes I have employed sarcasm. But,did I hit anyone below the belt? Did I use words that border on abuse? Even with many of those I have widely differed, I have unreservedly expressed my appreciation for some of their abilities/talent that have come through their posts.

You could well have sought clarification before launching your outburst.

With regards,
Swami

Swami, most people posting here have some opinion or the other in the form of having a "view". There is nothing wrong in being "abundantly opiniated". Surely you too have abundantly expressed your opiniated views and so has Shri Saidevo.

As for "dissolution of the brahmin community" perhaps you have decided to be opinionated wrt to Kunjuppu ji's views. I do not think Kunjuppu ji has mentioned anywhere that "no good can be achieved for hinduism or for humanity with the legacy of brahminhood".

IMO, there is a difference between
1) brahminhood wrt slavery laws and
2) brahminhood wrt culture (in terms of language, food, clothing).
While the second one is much appreciated, today nobody wants slavery laws esp in the (dis)guise of 'divinity'. And that is the reality.

Regards.

 

[Nara]

Yes I have employed sarcasm. But,did I hit anyone below the belt? Did I use words that border on abuse? Even with many of those I have widely differed, I have unreservedly expressed my appreciation for some of their abilities/talent that have come through their posts.

Mr. SwamiTaBra, perhaps it was sarcasm that you employed, but coming in as a single sentence, without being addressed to anyone in particular, it is not unreasonable for any reader to take himself/herself as the target.

I was referring to the venerable member who has over 2000 posts to his credit and has ostensibly quit the forum and entreaties are flying around to bring him back. I stand by the phrase "sulking child".

Now, that is better, go for your target directly, don't stand behind snide remarks, sufficiently camouflaged to deny any malice later.

Sir, there were three perfectly honorable alternatives available to you, (i) support the entreaties, (ii) oppose the entreaties, or (iii) stay out of the nasty business. Instead of choosing one of these honorable actions you chose to make a snide, sarcastic remark.

Yes, K has left the forum, and yes, entreaties are flying around to bring him back. But why should that irk you to the extent that you have to resort to sarcasm such as "sulking child"?

It is the attitude of that venerable member and some of his ilk who seek to run down even what remain little precious within the brahmin community, who all Saidevo referred as ones "abundantly opiniated" in the forum Agraharams. Also it the same venerable member who practically calls for dissolution of the brahmin community as he believes no good can be achieved for hinduism or for humanity with the legacy of brahminhood. You should be discerning enough to know where the solvent is.

Now, what do you mean here? Name some names. From your earlier comment I suppose "venerable member" is K. "His ilk" must be yours truly. Perhaps in your books anybody who disagrees with your opinions is "abundantly opinionated". You are entitled to your opinion, but is it not better to argue out our opinions and let others decide whatever they want instead of using epithets like this? This kind of name calling is a mark of weakness of your arguments.

Yes, I do believe Brahminism is a scourge and humanity will be better off if we can consign it to history books. I do call for the dissolution of varna/caste system, annihilation of caste is a good thing, and that is my "abundantly opinionated" opinion. I am willing to state it and present arguments in favor of this opinion. If you wish join me in the debate, put up your arguments, but first, stop calling silly names.

Thank you....

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji

"You can clarify who is a brahmin and who is a non-brahmin; by what virtue are they decided?"

First of all, let me answer this question of yours.

Brahman is the term used for Parabramha in Hinduism. The one who has the knowledge of Brahman is called Brahmanan which is turned now days as Brahmin.

In this regard, any one who knows Him through Vedas and Upanishads or by any means can be called a Brahmin. It is not the sacred thread or birth which decides whether a person is Brahmin or not.

Even when a person did not take birth in the so called Brahmin family, but has the knowledge of Brahman and is self-disciplined/ lives as prescribed in Vedas, can be called a Brahmin.

Even when one takes birth in the so called Brahmin family, but not follow any prescribed rituals or not disciplined, then he is still a non-brahmin.

Most of the people called as Brahmins of today, including me are non-brahmins. Hardly few can be called Brahmins.

So, first of all, please change the though that Brahmaniyam is a caste system. Brahmin is not a caste but those who chanted Vedas and had it as their professions were called Brahmins by means of their profession as per Varnashrama.

Barhmaniyam is connected to each and every individual who tries to gain knowledge of Brahman.

A person who is SC or ST can also be Brahmin. A person who belongs to FC can also become non-brahmin through his activities.

I will tell you a story. There are two divisions in Iyengars namely Thenkalai and Vadakalai. Vadakalai Iyengars claimed themselves as Brahmins by birth. Also they were really Brahmins as they did poojas in temples. During the period of invasions, many of them feared for life and left the temples. Gods in temples were left without Aradhanas. Ramanuja decided to teach Vedas for who ever was interested. Whether they had sacred thread or not, if they were interested and bold, Ramanuja called them, gave them a sacred thread, taught them poojas and allowed them to do poojas. This is how Thenkalai Iyengars came into picture. Anyway, they are also Brahmins by their profession. Ramanuja thought about evenness in society even before you and I started thinking about it.

Hope I am clear about who is a Brahmin. I think few Brahmins who believe Brahmaniyam comes by birth may get angry with my thoughts. But, I am least bothered about their anger.

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji

"Your logic included some mention of negative-energies and all. What you haven't explained is how the mind of a Satvic person changes on hugging or touching others. I find little logic in your reasoning, when you prescribe "preventive measures to protect" ourselves."

Thanks for accepting that there is atleast little logic in my explanation. I will try to explain more clearly.

First of all, I mean to say that untouchability does not come on the basis of difference between a brahmin and non-brahmin. It is also not based on cleanliness. It comes based on the gunas. If a Brahmin is tamo/rajo, then he is also an untouchable.

You might have heard about trigunas namely Satvic, Rajo and Tamasic. Every human is a mixture of all these three. But, the life aim should be to become completely Satvic to attain Moksha. Almost all the practices of Hinduism are centered at Moksha (Salvation) because people thought life is a disease where sorrows are more than joy.

Take for example, a bucket of water is God and we are few drops of it. Only water can mix with water. Oil can’t mix with bucket water. So, two things of same frequency/properties can only match. God though is beyond all characters, is considered as 100% Satvic in this world of trigunas. Krishna also prescribes in Gita, to be Satvic, to attain Moksha. He says, rajo and tamo are pushed again and again into samsara and naraga till the Jeeva becomes Satvic. So, we should develop Satvic character to attain Moksha.

It is a natural tendency that, when some thing proceeds forward, there are also chances that the same reverts back. So, they took measures to stop reverse actions in spirituality.

Mind and its waves have some power. These waves can induce thoughts in people. For example, when you are in a situation that you are unable to call a person orally at a distance, just observe him with concentration for one or two minutes. He will automatically turn towards you. When a simple sight, with thoughts from the mind can perform this, why not a hug or touch can lead to transfer of mind waves?

So, waves from the mind of a rajo/tamo person has negative tendency and may induce negative thoughts. People are always attracted towards lower valued things. For example, keep an ice cream and a God’s photo in front of a person. Most of the people will pick lower valued thing, as they feel this gives more joy. It is maya. Of course, ice cream does not have any negative energy. But, I stated to explain people’s mentality.
When you ask a person whether he needs moksha or a home valued crores in center of a city, a Satvic says he needs moksha only. Rajo and Tamo ask for Home. When you say, some one should be killed to get that home, rajo takes one step backward, still tamo will be ready to do it.

So, there is gradation among humans based on characters. Though every one is a mixture of all these three, the pre-dominant one is termed as an individual’s character.
You might have come across that your parents didn’t allow you to have friendship with some one in your child hood, whom they felt are not of good character. These advices are not only given in Brahmin families but also in non-brahmin communities who are disciplined. This is because they fear that the worse character may stick to the child. This is the power of mind.

Pressure, Temperature or anything in the world tries to maintain anything in equilibrium. Say a person 30% (imaginary fraction) Satvic has a hug with one who is 80% Tamasic, assume what happens. The waves try to be in equilibrium. It results in the pollution of Satvic. It may be a positive for 80% Tamasic but what about Satvic. He has to climb the ladder again.

So, our ancestors said better don’t touch each other and don’t have the transfer of energies. Be as you with your energy obtained through your Sadhana. But, the touch of a great saint is quite different. Saints are almost 100% Satvic, nearing the character of God. So, negatives flowing toward them dilutes automatically. Moreover, as I said already, saints are those who always think about God. So, God comes for their rescue.
I too suggest the same thing. When we are in trouble and have to guard ourselves, we don’t have any option other than calling God for rescue. Just by chanting the name of God, you touch or hug any one. You will be protected by God. At the same time, the divine energy showered on you may turn your counter part Satvic to certain extent.
I am not saying that a Brahmin is Satvic and a non-brahmin is rajo/Tamasic. Any one can be any thing. We don’t know. So, its better to take preventive measures with every one, irrespective of their race and religion.

So, untouchability in the name Madi and Achara came into existence for all human beings. But, Brahmins those who followed these blindly, without knowing the logic behind, dis-respected others, naming them as untouchables, as if Brahmins were superior. People those who are assumed as non-brahmins by birth, suffered repeatedly and started seeing Brahmins as their enemy. This is what happened.

Though there were four varnashramas, there were no fights and any problem of untouchability between these four divisions in ancient period. But, only in the medieval period, these concepts grew by blindly following old practices, without knowing the logic behind.

Now, we should totally avoid untouchability. But, at the same time, we should not accept that people saying our ancestors are fools. I won’t agree whether it’s you or any one else who was hurted by this practice saying them as fools and these practices as superstitions. Those who follow it blindly are fools but not those who created those. Conversions are occurring only because people think beliefs of Hinduism are illogical. We should try to explain the logic as far a possible and save Hinduism. Leave Brahmnaniyam. First see if we can save Hinduism because every thing is under threat.
If some one is rejected in the name of untouchability, please explain him/her the concept behind and say that the person who rejected you is also untouchable. He will be happy. If possible, try to explain those who blindly follow this. When this slowly gets spread, people will start chanting the name of Lord while touching each other. So, untouchability will also demolish and there are also a chance that every one turns Satvic and Hinduism is also saved to certain extent.

This assumption of Brahmins as superiors and non-brahmins as untouchables is practiced for about 400 to 500years. But, you are asking people to provide immediate solution. How is this possible? It will atleast take 50 more years to become clear on concepts and the messages will spread slowly. Negatives spread quickly but positives take some time.

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji

"That doesn't make a difference to the present form of untouchability."

Present untouchability is a superstition or blind belief. But, ancient untouchability had a strong logic behind and every one irrespective of caste were untouchables, even Brahmins.

"See, you first explain if the issue is about uncleanliness. If not please explain how a man of Satvic qualities will lose them if he comes in contact with others. If difference castes considered each other untouchable, it clearly hinders the progress of the society itself."

No. Untouchability I explain is not based on cleanliness. It is based on human characters. I already explained in the above, how a person loses purity by touching others. Negative energies mean negative thoughts. Every one believes in jealousy and believes that one being jealous on other may affect him, whether he is a brahmin or non-brahmin. What affects here? Those are mere thoughts from mind. Mind waves. How a doctor hypnotizes his patient. Only through these mind waves. So, they exist and are not superstitions.

Mind is one of the subtle bodies of humans. Please refer the link below.

The subtle Energy systems in the body

For your information, I have felt Kundalini also, though I can’t prove to others. But, it is upto you to believe it or not. Anyway, the link is to show that mind is one of the subtle bodies. All recordings are carried away in the mind. Man only loses physical body after death. So, he continues with his purva jenma vasanas. This is how our Gyanis told Gyana is also carried forward birth to birth.

To know about subtle bodies, please carry over the head profile experiment in front of a mirror. You will see one more layer around your head. You can also try on others but every thing with deep concentration.

You need not consider other one as untouchable or hurt them by using the word. But, what is wrong in chanting a God’s name in mind while touching. Will this hinder the progress of society?

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji

"It is because of thinking that you will get polluted on touching someone that untouchability came to practice. I am not concerned with a solution to this "problem", the real problem I am facing is having to do with such thought in members of our community. No wonder we will be considered superstitious."


I agree with you. Untouchability is gone in other communities. If Brahmins have still stuck to untouchability, they may be asked to chant the name of God, by explaining the back ground of untouchability. A solution definitely comes in next 50 years, as old people will die and youngsters are ready to accept if there is a logic.

I believe all other points of yours are also answered with the above. As time is 11.30 pm, I will stop here. Anyway, I will go through your posts when time permits and give reasoning, if known to me.

Please let me know, if you want me to explain the concept of untouchability more clearly.

 

[Nara]

......I will tell you a story. There are two divisions in Iyengars namely Thenkalai and Vadakalai. Vadakalai Iyengars claimed themselves as Brahmins by birth. Also they were really Brahmins as they did poojas in temples. During the period of invasions, many of them feared for life and left the temples. Gods in temples were left without Aradhanas. Ramanuja decided to teach Vedas for who ever was interested. Whether they had sacred thread or not, if they were interested and bold, Ramanuja called them, gave them a sacred thread, taught them poojas and allowed them to do poojas. This is how Thenkalai Iyengars came into picture. Anyway, they are also Brahmins by their profession. Ramanuja thought about evenness in society even before you and I started thinking about it.

Hope I am clear about who is a Brahmin. I think few Brahmins who believe Brahmaniyam comes by birth may get angry with my thoughts. But, I am least bothered about their anger.

psnvasan, if I am not mistaken, you mentioned you are a very young person. So, I am really astonished at the air of authority with which you write, as though you have amassed vast knowledge from long years of study.

However, the content of what you write, at least some of it, the air of authority you display not withstanding, does not meet even minimal standards of authenticity. For instance, the story you have narrated above, there is no evidence to support it, nil, nada, zilch. Neither of the two canonical hagiographies of Sri Vaishnavas (Iyengars) mention anything remotely like what you are claiming. There is not a single recorded instance of NB converted into B within SV history. I really wonder from where you are making these stories up.

You don't have to be bothered about anybody's anger, that is true, but I think you should be bothered about the authenticity of what you are saying with such confidence that comes to only those who don't know what they don't know.

Thank you.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Psnvasanji (1)

The main points are:

A. People's feelings
B. The course our civilization took down in history after practicing this.
C. False reasoning by using a false theory - which is the reason people will believe we are superstitious and anti-intellectual in sense of reasoning regarding this matter.

----

Your idea of who is a brahmin agrees with mine and I believe it is coherent to what the scriptures actually say. But your theories on the issue of untouchability seem to reflect a tone of religious justification, by theories not everyone accept, nor which are accurate IMO.

What you have sadly missed is how ideas like what you say are the exact reasons this issue had turned from a social problem, to a divider of society, to the fall of our civilization, and our following misery, dishonour and poverty.

"For example, when you are in a situation that you are unable to call a person orally at a distance, just observe him with concentration for one or two minutes. He will automatically turn towards you. When a simple sight, with thoughts from the mind can perform this, why not a hug or touch can lead to transfer of mind waves?"

Sri Psnvasanji, I don't want to appear against everything you say. But there is nothing of this sort that has been proved. It may be true, but this has happened to me and its because that the person looks around (like all of us do) in regular intervals and finds you looking at them. We tend to look around generally and spotting someone behind us as we do that is hardly surprising.

"So, waves from the mind of a rajo/tamo person has negative tendency and may induce negative thoughts. People are always attracted towards lower valued things."

But how then will the good ever influence the ones who need to get away from negative tendencies in life if they keep avoiding them? With every section of society staying away from one another only, this state of things came in our land. And many of the brahmins and upper castes who practiced this treated others who worked under them, not like humans. What great qualities did such people have, which they had fear of losing? This is a fallacious reasoning of yours.

"For example, keep an ice cream and a God’s photo in front of a person. Most of the people will pick lower valued thing, as they feel this gives more joy. It is maya."

Neither the God's photo, nor the ice cream are of true worth - only virtue and duty is of true worth. Just yesterday, certain Sai Baba worshippers came to me and begged, they tried to convince me that if I emptied my wallet (of around Rs. 200), all good would come my way. They came to the point of actually trying and snatching the amount from my hand! First they bugged me I gave them Rs. 7, but they continued to pester me after which I gave them Rs. 10 and made them leave and told them I would need my own money too.

The reason I don't like such characters is they use the name of divinity to be lazy and get money off other's hardwork. Our philosophy in life should be steered to doing work, not merely talking about religion. This is also the reason that giving a religious reply as yours will not be a soothing balm to those who have been affected by untouchability. Please try and understand, if you are doing this to justify the rationale behind what untouchability once was, its not convincing nor does it put to rest the real, contemprorary problems we, as a society are facing under it.

"You might have come across that your parents didn’t allow you to have friendship with some one in your child hood, whom they felt are not of good character. These advices are not only given in Brahmin families but also in non-brahmin communities who are disciplined. This is because they fear that the worse character may stick to the child. This is the power of mind."

How does it spread by touching? Nowadays, influences (potentially bad and good) are everywhere, as a person walks out of his house only its the case (today or anyday). How are we going to keep children out of these? The fact is that they will be exposed to everything and we can only influence their thought process by talking (dialogue) with them on what they feel about issues. You cannot make a person overcome bad things or anything by hiding things from them throughout their life (story of Rishyasringa is hints to this idea). Having already said that influences are everywhere, we have to make people enlightened so that they choose the right path, rather than putting them in boxed up lives, where they listen to others and don't build their decision making abilities.

"So, untouchability in the name Madi and Achara came into existence for all human beings. But, Brahmins those who followed these blindly, without knowing the logic behind, dis-respected others, naming them as untouchables, as if Brahmins were superior. People those who are assumed as non-brahmins by birth, suffered repeatedly and started seeing Brahmins as their enemy. This is what happened."

Explaining what happened is fine. Right now, I would like the community members to address the issue as it is today, and what we (as brahmin) community should do about it. This is the most important aspect of any discussion on untouchability at this point, IMO.

"Now, we should totally avoid untouchability. But, at the same time, we should not accept that people saying our ancestors are fools."

Let us not bring this to defending our ancestors. IMO there were fools and sensible intellects, brutes and compassionate people amongst our forefathers, and there is nothing odd about that. The fact still remains that our civilization fell once; plus, the issue today is we live in a poor country, and amidst numerous anomosities, castes, illteracy and traditions, it would seem that poverty is the least of the problems.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Psnvasan (2)

"Conversions are occurring only because people think beliefs of Hinduism are illogical. We should try to explain the logic as far a possible and save Hinduism."

See Sri Psnvasan, if the explainations are as you are giving, then it will continue to sound illogical. And caste system is seen as CRUEL, and thus cruelty is reflected upon our tradition and way of life.

Its necessary for the good to influence the less virtues by potraying themselves as the examples - this is what every great leader on the Earth has done. How can this come by not interacting? When you say solution to this is chanting so and so, is not the solution, because the very idea that you are being infected by negative energies is the problem. That sort of thinking should go because its only paranoia, that something wrong has happened to you merely by interacting with others. True men of virtue of firm and true brahmin cannot be led to negative habits by contact.

The other main point is we need to speak of untouchability from the point of view of people's emotions, dignity and feelings, these seem to have been put in the backburner in all this talk of negative energies.

"But, you are asking people to provide immediate solution. How is this possible? It will atleast take 50 more years to become clear on concepts and the messages will spread slowly."

What concept are you looking for? This is not rocket science. What I, or others like Sri Brahmanyan are saying is people's feelings are important and of great value. This untouchability, with whatever theory of yours, you justified, still gives complete disregard to humans as humans and treats them like some unwanted low lives - this is the primary issue here or the "concept" that needs to be understood.

"It is based on human characters. I already explained in the above, how a person loses purity by touching others. Negative energies mean negative thoughts. Every one believes in jealousy and believes that one being jealous on other may affect him, whether he is a brahmin or non-brahmin. What affects here? Those are mere thoughts from mind. Mind waves. How a doctor hypnotizes his patient. Only through these mind waves. So, they exist and are not superstitions."

See, jealousy can come to others even if they have merely seen a person, such things may have effect. But having said that people can become jealous merely on hearing the exploits or others, or merely seeing them - the issue would mean they should all live in separate caged worlds which is meaningless.

Tell others in scientific community, what you have here about the way mind waves are transmitted, and let me see if they consider it valid. They obviously will consider it delusional superstition. There is no point or validity of goodness, if it is destroyed or affected so easily.
I don't disagree that there exist subtle energies of the mind, I just don't accept that they function in the manner you theorize.

" If Brahmins have still stuck to untouchability, they may be asked to chant the name of God, by explaining the back ground of untouchability. A solution definitely comes in next 50 years, as old people will die and youngsters are ready to accept if there is a logic."

We need a solution, not against untouchability but for such thinking as yours. People don't get affected by touching or coming in contact with others. The manner in which you base every post of yours shows how you are not arguing on the lines others will accept.

You are relying on religious theories, but don't seem to give weight to the emotional atrocity the very act is. The brahmins of 150-200 years ago, were servants of a foreign government. Were they virtuous people because they treated others like untouchables and merely got work done out of them?

It is because of non-interaction between different stratas of society that we fell. Tell me the importance of interaction in society, along with regarding the emotion and dignity of others is more important than theories of negative energies? Someone tell this to a low worker, the right question would be:

"Is the negative energy flowing from the upper caste to the labourer or vice versa?"

For surely a person making another toil in his fields, while not so much as giving him regard as a human is far negative than one working day and night for basic bread. I hope you understand what is the primary message in my posts.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Naraji,

I am really young as i said earlier and got sincerely into spirituality only two years back. But, Gyana is something which follows birth by birth. Though i can't prove it, i am sure that no one need to gain knowledge again and again in all births. It continues through our births. I even know who i was in my previous birth, the karmas i did and have decided how should i live. My main intention is to save Hinduism first. Hinduism itself is under threat now days. I am finding logic for all the practices in Hinduism. Though i don't have proofs now, i will get them one day. When Hinduism itself comes to end, no one can claim i am a Brahmin or non-brahmin. No one will have rights to follow our own religion.

I am seeing a Hindu as Hindu, not as Brahmin or Non-brahmin. But, at the same time, i can't reject the truths, i found as truths.

As of today, i got Gazette proof for existence of soul after death. Similarly, i will try to collect proofs for every thing.

Regarding divisions in Iyengars, i don't have any documentary proofs. But, i will try to get those from some scriptures, if available. Anyway, Vadakalai Iyengars think themselves as superior and hesitate some times to have marriage alliance with Thenkalai Iyengars. Many Iyengars know this themselves but feel shy to express, because they want to establish that they are real Brahmins by birth. But, they should understand that Brahmaniyam does not come by birth.

You may ask some Iyengar to satisfy yourself. But,document records are not there with me as of now.

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji,

I have gone through your post, but it is already time to leave to office. I will reply the same today evening.

Thanks for reading and replying the posts.

 

[SwamiTaBra]

Dear Sri Nara,

Yes, I do believe Brahminism is a scourge and humanity will be better off if we can consign it to history books. I do call for the dissolution of varna/caste system, annihilation of caste is a good thing, and that is my "abundantly opinionated" opinion.

If so, what is the raison d'etre for starting the web-site? A site on sociology would have been better. The moderator and the founder of this website should clarify. To pay you back in the same token, since you have said "believe Brahminism is a scourge", makes fellows like me infer that what you said on the matter smacks of prejudice and all your scholarship that manifest through the arguments you advance are just to clothe those entrenched prejudices. (emphasis on "believe")

Now that Sangom, that earnest elderly personage has left, you can chuckle.

I choose not to react to rest of what has been stated in your post; the viewers themselves can make their sensible judgements.

With regards,
Swami

 

[SwamiTaBra]

IMO, there is a difference between
1) brahminhood wrt slavery laws and
2) brahminhood wrt culture (in terms of language, food, clothing).
While the second one is much appreciated, today nobody wants slavery laws esp in the (dis)guise of 'divinity'. And that is the reality.

I wonder what make you equate slavery with the caste divisions. This is purely a mischievous western ploy employed in a conference or racism/slavery held in South Africa a few years back. I personally aware of some of the groups from South India (calling themselves Human Rights groups) who have trotted that.

Even in its most despicable form, the casteism/untouchability comes nowhere near the brutality under the institution of slavery from ancient Greece, medieval Islam and more recently of the blacks.

With regards,
Swami

 

[happyhindu]

I wonder what make you equate slavery with the caste divisions. This is purely a mischievous western ploy employed in a conference or racism/slavery held in South Africa a few years back. I personally aware of some of the groups from South India (calling themselves Human Rights groups) who have trotted that.

Am making this post for the readers (since yet again your voice is far too familiar for any form of conversation).

Those who wish can read up on the fights between the aryas and dasyus. There are quite a few cultural differences between the aryas and dasyus. The dasyus were called riteless (without fire), and their ways were demonised by the aryas. The dasyus were worshippers of the phallus (there are enough books which can be read online on this from google books).

It has been suggested by some historians that the dasyus were also vedic but followed a different veda (some say it was the atharva which was not recognised as a veda initially).

The dasyus were also supposedly associated with idol worship (some say they were agama followers). Those interested in more details on the dasyus and their worship can kindly read the book "The origin of Saivism and its history in the Tamil land" by KR Subramanian to know more on shaivism and if it can be called "vedic". Some parts of the book can be read online here: The origin of Saivism and its ... - Google Books

There are frequent refs to physiognomy of the daasas / daasyus in the vedas also. The dasyus were called

a) anaasa (noseless, that is people of platyrrhine nose)
b) mrdhravacah (of unintelligable speech - so obviously they spoke a language different from the aryas)..
c) vrsasipra (bull lipped, meaning those with big thick lips)
d) The Rigvedic hero Trasadasyu was called leader of "dark complexioned men" in the Rig. Indra overthrew krshnayonih dasih and krsnagarbha is frequently taken to mean 'pregnant with a dark complexioned child'.

So the dasyus were people with a flat nose, thick lips, dark complexion and spoke a language different from the aryas. The dasyus came to be clubbed with the term 'shudra' since all of them were considered enemies of the aryas.

The smrithis were written after the vedic period. The term used for "slave" in manusmrithi is also the word "daasa".

The smrithis are full of references reg how to treat a shudra or how to keep a shudra / dasyu down. In the thread "Brits are to Blame" you can find verses from Manusmrithi which show that a shudra could be tortured (using violence to force a shudra to follow the master was sanctioned in manusmrithi).

And if someone killed a shudra slave he only had to give away cows as a fine and that too he had to give the cows to brahmins. So in the end brahmins only profitted. No one knows how many slaves were killed like this.

Even if we do not look at smrithis, everyone knows how low-castes were treated in India even in the recent past. If that was not slavery, then God knows what it was.

Even in its most despicable form, the casteism/untouchability comes nowhere near the brutality under the institution of slavery from ancient Greece, medieval Islam and more recently of the blacks.

If a priest in a temple follows madi-aacharam it is expected of him as a part of his job. It is appreciated. But the hypocricy comes when self-proclaimed brahmins in secular jobs justify untouchability in public secular life. And the public finds it ridiculous.

Comparing casteism/untouchability/slavery with the slavery of medieval europe, islam, blacks, whatever, whereever, etc is not an excuse for letting slavery exist within hindusim. In today's India, there is no place for casteism/untouchability/slavery.

Regards.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Happyhindu

The idea that shiva worshippers were "original" dravidians destroyed by aryans is a ridiculous idea - a propaganda of the British Empire. I can debate on this, as I did for 5 years in an (extinct) Orkut communtiy.

"a) anaasa (noseless, that is people of platyrrhine nose)
b) mrdhravacah (of unintelligable speech - so obviously they spoke a language different from the aryas)..
c) vrsasipra (bull lipped, meaning those with big thick lips)
d) The Rigvedic hero Trasadasyu was called leader of "dark complexioned men" in the Rig. Indra overthrew krshnayonih dasih and krsnagarbha is frequently taken to mean 'pregnant with a dark complexioned child'."

All these are reference to the translations of T.H. Griffith, the British Empire hired Vedic "scholar", who tried to prove that racism existed in the Vedas. Why do they make such references? Because phrenology and eugenics were the craze in Europe at the time, which made them believe some two races had a racial war in India.

Anti-brahminists I debated in Orkut were quick to buy such things because it was a criticism of the shrutis of the brahmins, but I can see how you have been pulled into it too.

"So the dasyus were people with a flat nose, thick lips, dark complexion and spoke a language different from the aryas. "

Nice. This was a classic of the debates, I can assure you the translations are completely ridiculous. We can debate this if needed, but maybe it will be best to create a separate thread for that.

=================================

This thread should be about untouchability....

I agree that untouchability shouldn't be compared as being kinder than slavery. In the documentary of untouchability, (which is a total length of about 1 hr 50 min), they told of an Andhra woman whose hands were chopped off because she refused to work under a upper caste man - this is extreme brutality. And I am sure the situation in the North is much more cruel. I would say, let's not compare ourselves to slavery in the Islamic or Western world, let us focus on what we need to do.

The cruelty of untouchability not only affects innocent people, but it makes our way of life to look as evil, oppressive and against basic rights. This is not what our culture is about, it is about spreading knowledge and arts. The brahmin community is viewed badly from a historical point of view because as I said earlier, Ambedkar's struggle to establish the constitution and equal rights is seen as a struggle against brahminical caste system. What does it reflect of our image in society?

"If a priest in a temple follows madi-aacharam it is expected of him as a part of his job. It is appreciated."

Perhaps I could agree with that. But I would still think it doesn't reflect on us well. We must come to better define and understand what it means to be "pure" or something. I would wish that a change in mindset comes, but at the same time we shouldn't outrightly disregard tradition because there may very well be aspects which haven't understood. The simple formula is to also give consideration to how others around us feel by such practices too.

=================================

The purpose of this community should be to gather us all, so that we can redefine our goal as a community. The goal needs to be centered around the development of our country. Brahmin tradition has a great deal which people appreciate as being good, but we have stayed away from others, instead we should interact.

On one hand people acknowledge that brahmins have had hand in freedom struggle, rising India in modern age, education. But on other hand we are seen as oppressors and superstitious people because of our practices like untouchability.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[happyhindu]

@ Sri Happyhindu

The idea that shiva worshippers were "original" dravidians destroyed by aryans is a ridiculous idea - a propaganda of the British Empire. I can debate on this, as I did for 5 years in an (extinct) Orkut communtiy.

Dear Shri Vivek Ji,

I did not use the word "dravidian" in my post above. IMO no community and no linguistic group today can claim to be linked to the 'arya" or "dasa" of the vedic period.

"a) anaasa (noseless, that is people of platyrrhine nose)
b) mrdhravacah (of unintelligable speech - so obviously they spoke a language different from the aryas)..
c) vrsasipra (bull lipped, meaning those with big thick lips)
d) The Rigvedic hero Trasadasyu was called leader of "dark complexioned men" in the Rig. Indra overthrew krshnayonih dasih and krsnagarbha is frequently taken to mean 'pregnant with a dark complexioned child'."

All these are reference to the translations of T.H. Griffith, the British Empire hired Vedic "scholar", who tried to prove that racism existed in the Vedas. Why do they make such references? Because phrenology and eugenics were the craze in Europe at the time, which made them believe some two races had a racial war in India.

I do not think the terms can be linked to racism. Race is out of question. The terms more likely merely just existed as description of the dasyus. Am also aware that in one place in the rigveda Indra was asked to fight against both, the dasyus and the aryas. IMO the fights were over cattle, culture and arable land, (no race scenario here).

Anti-brahminists I debated in Orkut were quick to buy such things because it was a criticism of the shrutis of the brahmins, but I can see how you have been pulled into it too.

"So the dasyus were people with a flat nose, thick lips, dark complexion and spoke a language different from the aryas. "

Nice. This was a classic of the debates, I can assure you the translations are completely ridiculous. We can debate this if needed, but maybe it will be best to create a separate thread for that.

I would love to hear from you reg the translations. Please either make a new thread or you can explain the translations to me on this thread itself. No debate please, i wud like to learn from you.

=================================

This thread should be about untouchability....

I agree that untouchability shouldn't be compared as being kinder than slavery. In the documentary of untouchability, (which is a total length of about 1 hr 50 min), they told of an Andhra woman whose hands were chopped off because she refused to work under a upper caste man - this is extreme brutality. And I am sure the situation in the North is much more cruel. I would say, let's not compare ourselves to slavery in the Islamic or Western world, let us focus on what we need to do.

The cruelty of untouchability not only affects innocent people, but it makes our way of life to look as evil, oppressive and against basic rights. This is not what our culture is about, it is about spreading knowledge and arts. The brahmin community is viewed badly from a historical point of view because as I said earlier, Ambedkar's struggle to establish the constitution and equal rights is seen as a struggle against brahminical caste system. What does it reflect of our image in society?

"If a priest in a temple follows madi-aacharam it is expected of him as a part of his job. It is appreciated."

Perhaps I could agree with that. But I would still think it doesn't reflect on us well. We must come to better define and understand what it means to be "pure" or something. I would wish that a change in mindset comes, but at the same time we shouldn't outrightly disregard tradition because there may very well be aspects which haven't understood. The simple formula is to also give consideration to how others around us feel by such practices too.

=================================

The purpose of this community should be to gather us all, so that we can redefine our goal as a community. The goal needs to be centered around the development of our country. Brahmin tradition has a great deal which people appreciate as being good, but we have stayed away from others, instead we should interact.

On one hand people acknowledge that brahmins have had hand in freedom struggle, rising India in modern age, education. But on other hand we are seen as oppressors and superstitious people because of our practices like untouchability.

Regards,
Vivek.

I agree with all the above.

Regards.

 

[Nara]

....To pay you back in the same token, since you have said "believe Brahminism is a scourge", makes fellows like me infer that what you said on the matter smacks of prejudice and all your scholarship that manifest through the arguments you advance are just to clothe those entrenched prejudices. (emphasis on "believe")

SwamiTaBra, what is it with all these personal characterizations? Please sir, enough with ad hominems, having a belief does not make one, ipso facto, "abundantly opinionated" or "prejudiced". Just imagine sir, how you will feel if people call you names. Instead of telling me I am opinionated and prejudiced, how about we discuss the merits of our beliefs?

Now that Sangom, that earnest elderly personage has left, you can chuckle.

SwamiTaBra, This is a completely uncalled for swipe. As I have repeated many times in this forum my respect for Shri Sangom is unsurpassed, I still have that respect for him. In the matter of K, I had very sharp disagreement with him, and the matter is very well known now. It was a nasty business, please don't make it worse. Shri Sangom and I agree on most issues and we disagree only in a few. With Sangom not participating I have lost a valuable ally on most issues. So, please, don't try to fish in troubled waters.

I choose not to react to rest of what has been stated in your post; the viewers themselves can make their sensible judgements.

Fair enough!

Thank you ....

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji,

Sorry for the delay in reply. I was quite busy. A long explanation below, but I believe every one has patience to read. I will write as understandable as possible.
Untouchability and caste systems should be approached in four different angles, in which three are main sources (1, 2 & 3), forming a triangle and the sufferers are at the center. Brahmins are in fact one category of sufferers.

1. Politicians who promote caste system for votes, based on caste/community.
2. SC/ST associations, who assume themselves as backward and not ready to give up their positions for evenness in society, as they get more benefits from the Government like seats in college, office, getting education loans easily etc. They are comfortable in claiming themselves as back ward for these benefits. They raise flag, if some one tries to demolish caste system. They forget that only caste systems promote untouchability. People are even ready to convert to get backward community certificate for perishable material benefits. This includes some Brahmins also, which is a shame for our community. Only God can save the society.
3. Brahmins who mis-understood the concept of untouchability and caste/ Brahmaniyam.
4. Brahmins who blame Brahmins itself and underestimate the ancestors/their practices, which is not much hindering the society but greatly the Brahmin community.

I keep Brahmins in third and last place, because there is no use in blaming Brahmins alone or calling their beliefs as superstitions. The problem is with every one in the society.

Few Brahmins may blindly hurt others. But, if you see untouchability in temples, practices like sprinkling water on flowers, not allowing touching priests is followed with every one. These practices exist even when Brahmins go to temples.

Any sensible man will think that even Brahmins are treated as untouchables in such places. A person who is not capable of thinking will assume that he alone is hurted by them. When political parties and SC/ST associations willingly promote caste system, there is no use in any one fighting with Brahmins alone.

One CM of Tamil Nadu, MGR tried to bring back communities based on ones salary. Who ever earns more money will be FC and who earns lower salary will be termed BC, so that the benefits can reach to a proper and right person. But, political parties and SC/ST associations raised flag against this plan, as they wanted to take revenge on Brahmins and enjoy all benefits.

Not all ST/SC are poor and not all Brahmins are rich.

So, there is no doubt that rich gets richer and poor gets poorer. No one has guts to question the political parties or such associations. As Brahmins are Satvic and are not willing to fight physically with anyone, every one blames Brahmins fearlessly. If they start murdering some one who blames and becomes arrogant like some politicians, then people’s blaming eyes and mouth will turn towards some one else. They will then start blaming those who are comparatively Satvic, as they are not dangerous.

Unless, you approach this from all three angles, untouchability or caste system can’t be demolished. If one is really interested in brining these to end, one should start questioning every one boldly and be ready to sacrifice his life, if political parties or such associations murder them.

“Once you can rectify the first two hinderers and hurters, I am ready to go to each and every Brahmin’s house and beg them to stop caste system and untouchability.”

 

[psnvasan]

Dear Vivekji

About proving spiritual things:

There are four pramanas in total, by means of which one can believe certain things. They are,

1. Pratyaksha Pramana

This believes some thing when it is physically seen.

Example:

a) Your parents are seen physically and felt physically. So, you believe they are present.
b) I have seen God Physically. So, I believe that God is present.
c) A table in front of you can be directly seen. So, you believe in it.

2. Anumana Pramana

This believes some thing based on certain signs of its presence.

Example:

a) In fire scenario, some thing starts smoking first and the fire is not directly seen at the beginning. But, fire will be hidden. Then only flame comes out. But, when there is a smoke, it is understood that fire is present though fire is not seen. This is the concept of smoke detectors.

So, when there is smoke, it is a sign that fire will flame out.

3. Agama Pramana

This blindly believes in Vedas, Sastras, and Scriptures etc.
Example:
a) Me believing that Vedas, Upanishads and other scriptures can aid me in Salvation, which is called as superstition or foolishness by modern science/ scientists.

4. Arithabathi Pramana

This believes giving a logical reasoning that some thing can’t be like this, so it must be present in other way.

Example:

a) Some people saying, I haven’t seen God, but have seen evil. There are two things in everything like day and night, positive attitudes and negative attitudes. Similarly when evil is present, there should some good things also like God.
b) Science can’t disprove God, hence He is proved.
c) Science can’t disprove the so called superstitions and hence they are proved, similar to corollary of a theorem in Geometry.

Now, all these four pramanas can be seen in both science and spirituality.

1. I saw a program in Discovery channel. A scientist explained, if some one can travel at the speed of light i.e. 3 x 108 m/s, definitely there will be a drastic difference in ageing, when compared with people living in world, with the world travelling on its own speed.

Now, is it practical that one can fly with the speed of light and show the difference in ageing? No. So, it is not Prathyaksha Pramana, but falls into some other category, which is a mere belief.

2. Scientists ask people to take food well before eclips, because they say that digestion will not be proper during this time. Has anyone captured a video of digestion process, by entering into the digestive tract with a camera during eclips? No. Scientists just say and we believe.

Of course, you can show some one who had digestion problem and its effects at such times. But, I had taken food before during eclips and my system was good enough to digest food I took. What if I say the proofs shown by science are just coincidence?

Is this Prathyaksha Pramana? No. It’s just Anumana Pramana. Many people had this problem during eclips. So, science says it is proved.

3. Physicists speak about static electricity. Humans also possess static electricity. When you even open a door in cold countries, you may feel a shock. One who has experienced it knows there is some thing called static electricity. Say, I haven’t experienced static electricity so far, can I say that static electricity is superstition? Am I not a fool then?

When science take advantage of other pramanas, for things that can’t be physically proved, people clap hands and welcome that. But, when we state something from our pramanas, people starts saying they are superstitions. Pitiable condition is that those who are supposed to believe those also say those are superstitions.

People forget to think of ‘what if’? Humans have a nature of assuming every thing with their practical life. But, they forget to think what if it can happen in other way.

For example, we need oxygen and moderate temperature, light everything to live. Those are not present in other planets. So, we come to a conclusion that there are no chances of people living in other planets. People welcome this attitude of science and clap hands.

Now let us take different living beings in this world.

1. Humans need oxygen to live, whereas plants also take carbon-di-oxide inside.
2. Humans can breathe continuously only on land, but sea creatures can even utilize oxygen in water for living.
3. Fish needs water to live, turtles can live both on land and in water, humans can live only on land.
4. Cockroaches are omnivores. They can eat anything and everything. Lions are carnivores. They eat only non-veg. Deers are herbivores. They only take plants. Present humans can’t be classified properly. I fear they may become omnivores in near future.
5. We can’t live without water whereas camels can live for days and months without water.
6. Anything can’t run as fast as Chaetae.
7. Humans breathe atleast 18 times on average per minute, whereas sea turtles breathe only 5 times a minute.
8. We need open atmosphere to live, whereas some micro beings can dig the earth and even live underground.

When living beings in the same world has these much discriminations, why not a being can live in other planets, even without oxygen and at high temperatures?

 

[psnvasan]

Modern science says, “Prove some thing, it will be believed.” But spirituality says, “Believe first. It will be proven to one who believes.”

After all, we live with our parents believing they are our true parents. Is every one doing DNA test to prove themselves? Every thing in life is a belief.
Even saving money and buying properties is with belief that we will live tomorrow. No one can guarantee tomorrow’s life.

Scientists can’t show air physically. But, we feel it. Scientists can’t show love and affection physically. But, we feel it. There are so many things that can’t be proved by science physically but are understood only based on feelings. But, they fail to understand that people who are spiritualists also have felt some thing and have some basis.

Do you know that great scientists like Albert Einstein, Sir Isaac Newton were great believers of God? If God is superstition per science, all those giant scientists were superstitious.

If we speak about Vedas, people say that Vedas were recently found some 10,000 years ago. Saint Vivekananda puts forward a question to such people. “If Newton found gravitational force, will you say that gravitational force itself was created only when he found? So, Vedas existed even before we found them.” What is the answer of scientists for this?

People believe these practices as superstitions because, they have fixed up their mind that spiritual concepts are only superstitions. A person who has fixed in mind that he will get a disease, will die sooner than who really got it. So, they should be open to analyze anything.

When they have closed their minds, why should you or I prove them our concepts? I feel it’s none of our business to prove things for those who are not ready to listen at all.

People should start thinking on, “What if untouchability was created for a true reason?”

So, don’t ask proof for every thing. Tell the concepts to who believes it. Leave others and they will realize one day. God will take care of the rest.
We are losing our total Hinduism slowly. Untouchability is a minor problem within people of same religion, while comparing with the former. We only fight within ourselves. No one has guts to clear it.

“On untouchability, it is my stand point that the problem should be approached in three different aspects though fourth one is minor. Brahmins only play a minor role in this and the first two have to be addressed severely and sincerely on first priority.”

Still, if you want me to prove others my theory or you want to remove my superstitions, I am sorry. I have a strong logic though not proven and I strongly believe on my logic I have analyzed so far. Neither you nor even God can remove such logics from my mind. I believe it is unnecessary spending of time arguing on this. I have lot of other works to do.

Thanks for patiently reading such long posts.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Psnvasan (1) - Political scene and its reasons

I agree with you that the reservation scheme in education is unfair. But it just points to the very fact I am saying, anti-brahminism has crept into South Indian society due to what happened in the past. We need a change in what we represent, and this should be made an official declaration.

"Not all ST/SC are poor and not all Brahmins are rich."

Agreed. But a poor brahmin is still better off than an ST/SC poor. The political aspect of caste system which victimizes brahmins can be challenged by us, but the ST/SC who are in villages, with on going discrimination against them have no hope.

"As Brahmins are Satvic and are not willing to fight physically with anyone, every one blames Brahmins fearlessly."

I agree that other non-brahmin upper castes (like in TN) have escaped that historical burden by pointing all faults to brahmins. But the reason for this is not what you have stated. For instance, the entire Hindutva violence is lead by brahmins (North ones though, but still).

The true reason behind why brahmins are held responsible is because the legacy of the Hindu philosophy is looked as pertaining to the brahmins, thus anything oppressive under it is attributed to us. This is the reason. We need to thus come out and say this doesn't pertain to us, we must NOT explain why it was done, or anything, because all that will look like efforts to absolve ourselves while overlooking the suffering. We must only oppose it and make efforts to educate and enlighten everyone.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Psnvasan (2) - What I mean by "proof" of Vedas is something necessary to show the world.


In response to the other post, I was not talking about proving Vedas by explaination or theory, but proving by practical effect. Understand the difference between the two because it is the way the world works.

Example: A bussiness man doing a bussiness of telecommunication equipment, doesn't know anything behind the science of it. He gets the desired result of communication, which builds his bussiness and sells. Automatically, the engineers under him get his respect for their intelligence. Fact remains that he knows nothing technical about the field. In the same method we should prove the Vedas or other scriptures we hold in high regard, otherwise the world (which is the bussiness man in analogy) will only mock us, and continuing disrespect will exist for believing a thing that doesn't reflect in practice; thus we will be considered superstitious.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Psnvasan (3)

"There are four pramanas in total, by means of which one can believe certain things. They are,
1. Pratyaksha Pramana - This believes some thing when it is physically seen.
2. Anumana Pramana - This believes some thing based on certain signs of its presence.
3. Agama Pramana - This blindly believes in Vedas, Sastras, and Scriptures etc.
4. Arithabathi Pramana - This believes giving a logical reasoning that some thing can’t be like this, so it must be present in other way."

This was an interesting classifcation, I must say. I will try and fit my explainations on the basis of these. Basically what I am saying is that we should change our belief in the Vedas from Agama Pramana to Anumana or Pratyaksha Pramana - only then we will get value as practical people and not as superstitious people.

It is fine to say and that not all aspects of the Vedas can be unraveled, but we should find a method of making its knowledge have positive effect in the practical world which is filled with problems like violence, disease, poverty, draught, famine etc. Without this, what is the purpose of pursuing such "belief"? It will only give us disrespect as being superstitious charltans whose profession is making people believe in superstitious things! We infact have the very image as being that in eyes of some.

"Science can’t disprove the so called superstitions and hence they are proved, similar to corollary of a theorem in Geometry"
"b) Science can’t disprove God, hence He is proved."

This reasoning is fallacious. You can't disprove I am wearing a red shirt while I am typing this, but it doesn't mean I am wearing a red shirt, because I am wearing a light blue shirt. Understand what I am saying?

In short: The absence of proof is not the proof of absence, nor is the absence of disproof, the proof of presence. In either case it may be true, or may be false. So just because something is not disproved, it isn't proved. Whether God exists or not depends greatly on how a person perceives the very idea of what is God.

"Say, I haven’t experienced static electricity so far, can I say that static electricity is superstition? Am I not a fool then?"

One thing is saying that so and so superstition will happen and it having no effect to everyone. If you tell me (by superstiton) that if I don't drink orange juice before leaving home, I will die that day, and one day I forget to drink orange juice, leave and return it clearly disproves your superstition. The other, which you mentioned here is non-experience of a phenomenon.

When speaking of say static electricity, they speak of certain conditions on whose basis the phenomenon occurs. If it suppose doesn't occur in that experimental set up, it would obviously mean something is not explained.

Finally, following an innocent superstition will do no harm, on the other hand if you base your entire life on a superstition, which affects others' life (like untouchability does) it is a more serious problem.

"For example, we need oxygen and moderate temperature, light everything to live. Those are not present in other planets. So, we come to a conclusion that there are no chances of people living in other planets. People welcome this attitude of science and clap hands."

The reasoning of all members in the scientific community is not always scientific and noboyd denied that, but that doesn't mean your reasoning is correct either. I have explained the problem with it also.

"Modern science says, “Prove some thing, it will be believed.” But spirituality says, “Believe first. It will be proven to one who believes.” "

Too many charltans have come in the name of spirituality and religion asking people to forsake things and "believe" after which they say good will come. Do you see the problem here? I can tell a person to give me his million dollar bank account for 100 years after that all good will come to his future generations. Is this called spirtuality? Not IMO. This is the reason brahmins have become hated by some, we used the name of belief to justify crimes on a human like untouchability. People see us as deceivers who do such evil things by making people "believe" in something.

The point is we should have a correct balance of belief and reason to progress practically. Pure reason is not possible because every answer (or reason) is the door to another question, we need to settle on an axiom. This is why nobody can understand see why logic is itself so logical. It just is - the basis of argument. Pure belief is meaningless because it would mean surrendering our life to those who may be liars and fraudulent people.

"“What if untouchability was created for a true reason?” So, don’t ask proof for every thing. Tell the concepts to who believes it. Leave others and they will realize one day. God will take care of the rest. We are losing our total Hinduism slowly."

I am not asking for proof of your negative enegry theories, I am stating that it is meaningless because its assumes good character in a person is so fickle, when it isn't. Most importantly, your theory did not explain how society would run smoothly if people have an aversion to interact with others. How will the good influence the world if they believed your ideas? What if we have already lost "our total Hinduism" due to such practices? Just clinging on to something even if it is baseless and cruel, merely because you believe it is traditional, degrades our culture and society.

At one point in history India was known for every school of philosophy, because of free thinking. Today, we have been reduced to keeping our brains in some freezer and following things for tradition sake, while the West has surged ahead in technology since the Renaissance. This is obviously an issue for us, and our civilization.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Happyhindu

I have created another thread for our discussion because it is another topic.

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/genera...asion-interpretting-scriptures.html#post65454

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[psnvasan]

Vivekji,

Tell me then what is the solution? If i write Bashya for all Vedas, Upanishads and our scriptures with logic and take this is to every one, even tribes, can this be overcome?

It is not possible to prove Vedas also, as no one can prove Bible or Quran also in the same way. But, why people are converting, when their holy books are also not proved? It is not because of practices like untouchability. It is because of lack of money. Christian missionaries give more money and people also get a certificate as backward for reservations.

Then people in Hinduism also should come forward to do more dharma. Only when people find a way to earn basic needs, they will be ready to listen.

But, basic needs can only be earned through proper education. If one rich Indian educates one poor Indian and every one does this, no one can stop the development of India. But, how to ensure that they will save our culture or Hinduism in future?

I will sponsor a child and teach him Hinduism right from child hood, as i believe i know atleast some thing. I can explain him every thing logically and bring him in such a way. But, how can we ensure that every one is doing that.

On seeing all these, i am seeing inside that Kalki is not far away from us. But, i too expect the same to happen soon so that Dharma can be re-established.

Anyway, thanks. I can say you are not ready to see the logic in my theory, because my theory didn't stop people touching each other and either directly or indirectly supports smoothness in society. But, at the same time explains that these are not superstitions.