No indian prime minister has addressed this question before

[Brahmanyan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Here is an interesting message forwarded to me from a member of a reputed Group, worth reading:


NO INDIAN PRIME MINISTER HAS ADDRESSED THIS QUESTION BEFORE


Narendra Modi answered to a question from a "secularist of Nehru/Gandhi type" which was intended to “trap" him.....Is there a place for Muslims in India?

Question was - When you see the future of India do you see India that is purely Hindu or do you see a place for 'Muslims' also in it?

Answer by Prime Minster Narendra Modi

This question is a problem faced by those people who do not have a proper understanding of what Hindu or Hindutva means and never try to grasp it either. Hinduism always believes in (quoting Sanskrit hymn) 'ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti' which means the "Truth is one but there are many paths to understand and get it". Hinduism is the only religion that says that 'God is one' and never says that the Muslim God is different, Christian god is different or Sikh god is different. A Hindu does not believe in the absolutism of his own God. He says each God is suitable and made for His believer. Hence what a Muslim believes in is his own faith and if he wants to pursue his God that way then he should be welcomed that way

Israel has an official book in which they say that they had been persecuted in every part of the world (especially in Germany). It further says that if there is a land where Jews were welcomed and never persecuted in its history, than it has been India where Jews have been living for centuries peacefully. (Note: This is true. When Israel's very first parliament was formed after its birth, the very first resolution they adopted was to thank India).

Similarly when the Parsis (Zorastrian fire worshippers) arrived in India in 7th century (They were driven out of Persia by the invading Muslim armies), they arrived in Gujarat where they were welcomed by the local Hindu King. They pleaded to the King that they had brought their God (sacred fire) also with them and wish to build a temple. In addition they requested that no non-Parsis should be within 5 km of their fire God. The Hindu King allowed this as well even though the request was against the Hindu practice of not excluding any of his own people from any house of worship. He not only settled them but built for them a fire temple and honored their request by barring locals from going near "The Fire Temple". So Hindus give protection to all other faiths.

Other faiths follow a 'holier than thou' philosophy which says that their God is the only truth and other beliefs and faiths are beneath them. That philosophy has lead to human conflicts and in extremity lead to terrorism and violence. It’s only a Hindu who incorporates all faiths within his belief.

So your question only shows lack of understanding of the culture, kind of traditions and heritage all HINDUS come from."

OUR WORLD CAN CERTAINLY DO WITH MORE LEADERS LIKE THIS!!!

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[tks]

I especially like the last sentence

"So your question only shows lack of understanding of the culture, kind of traditions and heritage all HINDUS come from"

There cannot be better ending for this response

 

[renuka]

But the question still remains as why when even Jews and Zorastrians were given place and respect yet the Dalit was not allowed into a temple.

???????

 

[Brahmanyan]

No Indianprime minister has addressed this question befor.

I especially like the last sentence

"So your question only shows lack of understanding of the culture, kind of traditions and heritage all HINDUS come from"

There cannot be better ending for this response

Dear Sri "tks",

What Prime Minister Modi has told is true. While searching on the History of Malabar in relation to the existence of multi religious Society, I came across some interesting facts, a brief account of which I wrote in my Blog, time permits kindly go through the same in the following Web-link:
Old Stylus: Kodungallur: Treasure-trove of History
Unlike the followers of Semitic religions, the followers of Vedic religion welcomed knowledge relating to the search of creation and creator on the metaphysical level.
"'Let auspicious thoughts come unto us from every direction'. (Rg Veda 1-89-1)

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[Brahmanyan]

​

But the question still remains as why when even Jews and Zorastrians were given place and respect yet the Dalit was not allowed into a temple.

???????

Doctor,

Good question. My search for a convincing answer still remains unfulfilled.
Though Jews and Zorastrians were permitted to practice their religion, I don't think they were allowed to enter Hindu Temples. As per my understanding one is Religious persecution and other is Social segregation. I am open for correction. "Dalit" is the name said to be given to the "oppressed and weak in the Society" by the great Social reformer of Maharashtra Mahatma Jyotirao Govindrao Phule. In the long drawn human history persecuting the weak and poor is common all around the globe, in the form of Slaves, indentured labour and Caste. Many reformists both Religious and Political had appeared time and again to rectify this great injustice to fellow human being. But it is a shame that the vestiges of this infirmity still continue in our Society.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[vgane]

Dear Sri "tks",

What Prime Minister Modi has told is true. While searching on the History of Malabar in relation to the existence of multi religious Society, I came across some interesting facts, a brief account of which I wrote in my Blog, time permits kindly go through the same in the following Web-link:
Old Stylus: Kodungallur: Treasure-trove of History
Unlike the followers of Semitic religions, the followers of Vedic religion welcomed knowledge relating to the search of creation and creator on the metaphysical level.
"'Let auspicious thoughts come unto us from every direction'. (Rg Veda 1-89-1)

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Dear Shri Brahmanyan,

I was enthralled and amazed to note the history of Kodungallur...You have brought this town to limelight..Next time when I visit Kerala, I shall go to Kodungallur

 

[renuka]

Doctor,

Good question. My search for a convincing answer still remains unfulfilled.
Though Jews and Zorastrians were permitted to practice their religion, I don't think they were allowed to enter Hindu Temples. As per my understanding one is Religious persecution and other is Social segregation. I am open for correction. "Dalit" is the name said to be given to the "oppressed and weak in the Society" by the great Social reformer of Maharashtra Mahatma Jyotirao Govindrao Phule. In the long drawn human history persecuting the weak and poor is common all around the globe, in the form of Slaves, indentured labour and Caste. Many reformists both Religious and Political had appeared time and again to rectify this great injustice to fellow human being. But it is a shame that the vestiges of this infirmity still continues in our Society.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Dear Sir,

I was reading Gulamgiri by Jyotirao Phule...he never minced his words..he was as direct as can be.

Gulamgiri is worth a read.

 

[sravna]

But the question still remains as why when even Jews and Zorastrians were given place and respect yet the Dalit was not allowed into a temple.

???????

Dear Renuka,

The significance of your question was realized by the great spiritual leaders of the past well exemplified in the Adi Sankara Chandala episode. That it took Sankara the need to realize the truth of equality shows how humans have a deep sense of segregation. Realizing the equality of all is indeed a holy grail but to be fair to hinduism it does indeed try to teach that.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Dear Shri Brahmanyan,

I was enthralled and amazed to note the history of Kodungallur...You have brought this town to limelight..Next time when I visit Kerala, I shall go to Kodungallur

Dear Sri "vgane",

Sure, please visit this historic town where the center of Malabar History is buried. The Bhagavathi Temple attracts thousands of devotees each day from Tamil Nadu and Kerala. The Devi also called Kodungallur Amma, is believed to be a memorial built by a Chera king to Kannaki, heroine of Ilamkovadigal's Tamil classic Silappathikaram.
Your appreciation of the Blog encourages me to write more.
Warm Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[sarang]

Very interesting and illuminating, Brahmanyanji. Will read other blog posts too soon.

In Indian Archaeology Group post, it was said that the earliest mosque was in Gujarat. But both Kerala and Gujarat were entry points and perhaps can claim for the first mosque.

Dear Sri "tks",

What Prime Minister Modi has told is true. While searching on the History of Malabar in relation to the existence of multi religious Society, I came across some interesting facts, a brief account of which I wrote in my Blog, time permits kindly go through the same in the following Web-link:
Old Stylus: Kodungallur: Treasure-trove of History
Unlike the followers of Semitic religions, the followers of Vedic religion welcomed knowledge relating to the search of creation and creator on the metaphysical level.
"'Let auspicious thoughts come unto us from every direction'. (Rg Veda 1-89-1)

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

The significance of your question was realized by the great spiritual leaders of the past well exemplified in the Adi Sankara Chandala episode. That it took Sankara the need to realize the truth of equality shows how humans have a deep sense of segregation. Realizing the equality of all is indeed a holy grail but to be fair to hinduism it does indeed try to teach that.

Dear Sravna,

One can read Manisha Panchakam of Adi Shankara and can forget it after a while but when reads the words of Dr Ambedkar..one does not forget.

Dr Ambedkar did mention that an untouchable was merely not an Untouchable to a Hindu but even to a Parsi and he gave an account on how he was not treated well by even a Parsi.

So you see..how can Parsis who were given shelter by Kings of India treat a Dalit badly?

This is what I fail to understand that Kings can be so nice to a total foreigner to the land in terms of race and religion but failed to provide for the untouchables.

Why fail your own race?

So frankly speaking I wonder what is there to feel so magnanimous about.

It is better to respect a King who does not give shelter to an outsider but protects his own subjects.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Very interesting and illuminating, Brahmanyanji. Will read other blog posts too soon.

In Indian Archaeology Group post, it was said that the earliest mosque was in Gujarat. But both Kerala and Gujarat were entry points and perhaps can claim for the first mosque.

Dear Sri "Sarang",

Jami Masjid at Sanjan, is considered oldest existing Mosque Gujarat built some time between 813-841 CE. There are quite a number of old Mosques also claim the primacy. However as per the recorded History Cheraman Perumal Juma Masjid , built in 629 AD at Kodungallur, Kerala by Malik-Ibn-Dinar is considered the first Mosque built in India.
Unfortunately the old structure the picture of the same given has been replaced by a new Mosque now at the same place.

I have gone through many writeups and articles available in the net about Kodungallur, which is truly a repository of History of Cheranadu.
Kindly go through my Blogs and write your valued comments, which will encourage me to write few more posts for which I have collected authentic material.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[sangom]

Here is an interesting message forwarded to me from a member of a reputed Group, worth reading:


NO INDIAN PRIME MINISTER HAS ADDRESSED THIS QUESTION BEFORE


Narendra Modi answered to a question from a "secularist of Nehru/Gandhi type" which was intended to “trap" him.....Is there a place for Muslims in India?

Question was - When you see the future of India do you see India that is purely Hindu or do you see a place for 'Muslims' also in it?

Answer by Prime Minster Narendra Modi

This question is a problem faced by those people who do not have a proper understanding of what Hindu or Hindutva means and never try to grasp it either. Hinduism always believes in (quoting Sanskrit hymn) 'ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti' which means the "Truth is one but there are many paths to understand and get it". Hinduism is the only religion that says that 'God is one' and never says that the Muslim God is different, Christian god is different or Sikh god is different. A Hindu does not believe in the absolutism of his own God. He says each God is suitable and made for His believer. Hence what a Muslim believes in is his own faith and if he wants to pursue his God that way then he should be welcomed that way

Israel has an official book in which they say that they had been persecuted in every part of the world (especially in Germany). It further says that if there is a land where Jews were welcomed and never persecuted in its history, than it has been India where Jews have been living for centuries peacefully. (Note: This is true. When Israel's very first parliament was formed after its birth, the very first resolution they adopted was to thank India).

Similarly when the Parsis (Zorastrian fire worshippers) arrived in India in 7th century (They were driven out of Persia by the invading Muslim armies), they arrived in Gujarat where they were welcomed by the local Hindu King. They pleaded to the King that they had brought their God (sacred fire) also with them and wish to build a temple. In addition they requested that no non-Parsis should be within 5 km of their fire God. The Hindu King allowed this as well even though the request was against the Hindu practice of not excluding any of his own people from any house of worship. He not only settled them but built for them a fire temple and honored their request by barring locals from going near "The Fire Temple". So Hindus give protection to all other faiths.

Other faiths follow a 'holier than thou' philosophy which says that their God is the only truth and other beliefs and faiths are beneath them. That philosophy has lead to human conflicts and in extremity lead to terrorism and violence. It’s only a Hindu who incorporates all faiths within his belief.

So your question only shows lack of understanding of the culture, kind of traditions and heritage all HINDUS come from."

OUR WORLD CAN CERTAINLY DO WITH MORE LEADERS LIKE THIS!!!

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

I would like to give a few points of relevance.

1. Kerala's geography was very different from what it is today, before the 18th. century C.E. Barring narrow land strips on the eastern edges, attached to the "Sahyan Ranges" or the western ghats, the rest of the land was divided into many small islands and islets. The attached copies of Maps of the 17th. century A.D. will reveal this point clearly.

2. Almost all the lands comprising the present Kerala (excluding small parts in the South - called "Venaad", and the northern Malabar areas, were all owned in perpetuity by Namboothiri families or "Illams" as they were known, and the king or Ruler had no rights or control over these Namboothiri-owned lands. (The Namboothiris' ownership rested on the claim that Parasurama who reclaimed the entire piece of land from down under the ocean, had given it to the Namboothiris as complete and unreserved "Daanam" by pouring water and flowers in the hands of the individual Namboothiris who were the original donees.) Their claim continued unchallenged throughout history till the 20th. century A.D., when land reform legislation of different types were passed into law by the democratically elected governments.

Hence there is hardly any mention of/reference to any Chera/Chozha or Pandya Kings/Kingdoms in any of the original epigraphies of Kerala. There is no mention of any Royal lineage like Chera, Cheramaan, Cheramaan ko or anything similar.

It is therefore to be concluded that if at all the rulers of the Chera dynasty did rule over any portion/s of the present day Kerala, then it must have been limited to the land strip west of the Palghat Pass in the western ghats (roughly the present day Palghat District at its maximum and some land areas which were firmly in place and connected to this strip (which will be the eastern edges of the Wayanad district at present.

3. Muziris was a port town which finds mention even in some of the Canka Tamil literature, but it is doubtful whether that Muziris was the same Kodungallur of today. However, one group of people are trying to market this notion, probably to boost the tourist potential of the place.

Location of coin hoards unearthed suggest an inland trade link from Muziris via the Palghat Gap and along the Kaveri Valley to the east coast of India. Though the Roman trade declined from the 5th century AD the former Muziris attracted the attention of other nationalities, particularly the Chinese, till the great floods of Periyar in the 14th century. (Muziris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)


4. In the absence of any definitive evidence as to the rule of Kodungallur or, for that matter, any known area of Kerala by the Perumals/Cheras (except perhaps the land strip referred to in 2 above) historians consider the Cheraman Perumal converting to Islam and visiting Mecca as nothing more than apocryphal beliefs.

But it is recorded fact that one of the Saamoothiri rulers of the northern part of Kerala promulgated a Royal edict requiring every Hindu family under his reign to bring up one male descendant (i.e., one son at least of every Hindu parents) as Moslem. This was necessitated by the fact that the Arab traders were progressively withdrawing from the region of Malabar (and going south towards Kollam and, around the sub-continent to the ports in Tamil Nadu) and as a consequence, pirates increased in the Arabian ocean and the Hindu soldiers (army) of the Saamoothiri utterly lacked the ability to combat the pirates who used to loot the ships when they approached the ports.

5. The trade relations with Arabs and the Saamoothiri were not strictly based on commercial considerations; as long as the Saamoothiri ruler was kept satisfied by the Arab traders - either through gifts or by military help to the ruler for him to win his battles with his enemies - the traders could enjoy a lot of freedom and concessions. It is highly improbable that a petty ruler/king like the Saamoothiri allowed the Arabs (mostly traders, sailors, soldiers, godown-keepers, etc.) to establish their trading posts, warehouses, small settlements and even their own place/s of worship, as a result either of his conviction about "ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti" or due to his confirmed advaita philosophy (centuries before AdiShankara propounded the Advaita Philosophy for the world !

The much misquoted ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti is a portion chiselled out of the following complete rik :—


indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamagnimāhuratho divyassasuparṇo garutmān |
ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadantyagniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ ||

This is a rik in praise of āditya and the rik means — the learned (people) call (this āditya) as indra, mitra, varuṇa, agni, the heavenly bird garuḍa which flies excellently and also as agni, yama, vāyu (mātariśvan), etc., although He is one and the same āditya.

It should thus be clear that this rik itself does not have any pretence to claims like "Truth is one but there are many paths to understand and get it". , nor that "God is one."; it simply explains the the then practice of the rik-composers of calling the one and only Sun-god by different names.

The circumstances attending others like the Cochin Jews were not much different. The Parsees came to India in the 10th. century or so and as per the wikipedia,

"The Qissa-i Sanjan is a tale of the journey of the Parsis to India from Iran. It says they fled for reasons of religious freedom and they were allowed to settle in India thanks to the goodwill of a local Hindu prince. However, the Parsi community had to abide by three rules: they had to speak the local language, follow local marriage customs, and not carry any weapons. After showing the many similarities between their faith and local beliefs, the early community was granted a plot of land on which to build a fire temple."

There is nothing to show that any Hindu king permitted the request "that no non-Parsis should be within 5 km of their fire God. The Hindu King allowed this as well even though the request was against the Hindu practice of not excluding any of his own people from any house of worship. "

It definitely gives satisfaction to imagine ourselves (i.e., Hindus) as having been a very ideal kind of people and some little "twists & turns" made to history to subserve this objective may not be harmful since most of these are just historical "anecdotes" at best. But the realities of today stare at us and while the Jews have practically all migrated to Israel and the Parsee population has also thinned due to exodus to the West, the Muslims are here and their numbers are increasing rapidly. If Shri Mody actually believes in the nice philosophical explanation he gave to the questioner, then he should also not mind if India becomes an Islamic nation in due course, as now claimed by the ISIS and its Caliphate! But will someone ask the PM's views on this possibility?

 

[sangom]

Two attachments added.

 

[tks]

Dear Sri "tks",

What Prime Minister Modi has told is true. While searching on the History of Malabar in relation to the existence of multi religious Society, I came across some interesting facts, a brief account of which I wrote in my Blog, time permits kindly go through the same in the following Web-link:
Old Stylus: Kodungallur: Treasure-trove of History
Unlike the followers of Semitic religions, the followers of Vedic religion welcomed knowledge relating to the search of creation and creator on the metaphysical level.
"'Let auspicious thoughts come unto us from every direction'. (Rg Veda 1-89-1)

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Sri Brahmanyan

Though I am not a history person I enjoyed reading your blog. I did not realize a place called Kodungallur was welcoming followers of ancient religions. It takes love of subject to recognize another expert who was the author of the book you mentioned.

The vedic culture in general promoted view points from all sources. The whole approach to debate via Purvapaksha as detailed in Sankara's commentaries attest to the total commitment by everyone to find the truth.

There is a lot one can learn from those approaches today

Thanks for sharing your blog with us

 

[tks]

.
.
.

The much misquoted ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti is a portion chiselled out of the following complete rik :—


indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamagnimāhuratho divyassasuparṇo garutmān |
ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadantyagniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ ||

This is a rik in praise of āditya and the rik means — the learned (people) call (this āditya) as indra, mitra, varuṇa, agni, the heavenly bird garuḍa which flies excellently and also as agni, yama, vāyu (mātariśvan), etc., although He is one and the same āditya.

It should thus be clear that this rik itself does not have any pretence to claims like "Truth is one but there are many paths to understand and get it". , nor that "God is one."; it simply explains the the then practice of the rik-composers of calling the one and only Sun-god by different names.

This is an excellent observation. The ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti is often misquoted and translated. The right context where it occurs actually refers Sat to another name for God (Sun) as pointed out . However if one were to extend the context to all the Upanishads, the way PM Modi used to convey his main point is not incorrect.

Within India and only in India we have the notion of 'Ishta Devatha' which accommodates people according to how they want to relate an abstract notion of Isvara. This one God (Sun) being referred to many names and many forms is an idea that supports the Ishta Devatha concept. Within the notion of Ishta Devatha, a person familiar with Hindu way of worship will have no problem accepting and respecting someone who wants to worship an formless entity called Allah or a 'Son of God, Jesus' with cross form as an icon or a God man like Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

This point was also brought well by Swami Vivekananda in his Chicago address as to how Hindu thinking not just tolerates other forms of worship but actually accepts them. This acceptance is not out of submission but due to understanding.

The larger point of Sri Modi is therefore intact notwithstanding the often mis-translated quote.

The circumstances attending others like the Cochin Jews were not much different. The Parsees came to India in the 10th. century or so and as per the wikipedia,

"The Qissa-i Sanjan is a tale of the journey of the Parsis to India from Iran. It says they fled for reasons of religious freedom and they were allowed to settle in India thanks to the goodwill of a local Hindu prince. However, the Parsi community had to abide by three rules: they had to speak the local language, follow local marriage customs, and not carry any weapons. After showing the many similarities between their faith and local beliefs, the early community was granted a plot of land on which to build a fire temple."

So what .. This does not change or dilute the larger point being made by PM Modi.

There is nothing to show that any Hindu king permitted the request "that no non-Parsis should be within 5 km of their fire God. The Hindu King allowed this as well even though the request was against the Hindu practice of not excluding any of his own people from any house of worship. "

g

Jewish people have indeed made a big deal that India was the only country that did not persecute them and that true 'separation of church and state' existed naturally in India for centuries. Recently some years ago many influential Rabbis representing Jewish faith signed a declaration to this effect in India during their visit. I do not have ready reference but can be obtained via online searches.

It definitely gives satisfaction to imagine ourselves (i.e., Hindus) as having been a very ideal kind of people and some little "twists & turns" made to history to subserve this objective may not be harmful since most of these are just historical "anecdotes" at best.

There is no need to imagine anything. When compared to the two major biblical religion and their theology requiring expansion and conversion by any means, today's Hindu approach to worship is one of acceptance. There are issues of discrimination but none are sanctioned by any of the teaching we have (I am referring to only Sruthi). Existence of Jews in India is not an anecdote. Lack of persecution is recognized by the Jewish state. The diversity of people, practices and religious traditions within India is not an anecdote. The idea is not to feel good or bad in PM Modi's answer. Instead it was to point out that the person putting forth the question lacks knowledge about the pulse of the Hindu traditions.

There will always be cynics and they will see the world the way they are.

But the realities of today stare at us and while the Jews have practically all migrated to Israel and the Parsee population has also thinned due to exodus to the West, the Muslims are here and their numbers are increasing rapidly. If Shri Mody actually believes in the nice philosophical explanation he gave to the questioner, then he should also not mind if India becomes an Islamic nation in due course, as now claimed by the ISIS and its Caliphate! But will someone ask the PM's views on this possibility?

France will turn into a nation of Islam in 20+ years. Many countries have been dominated by Islam within few decades after Muslims go there and multiply (and convert at any cost like what ISS is willing to do).

But in 1000 years of Islamic domination of India they have not made a big dent in India.

PM therefore does not have to answer the question suggested because people can see from history how Hinduism with all its contradictions have survived the test of time from Islam

 

[biswa]

Renukaji has a valid point. I think it is important to distinguish between the real spirit and meaning of Hinduism and the practice of it. There is no doubt that there was a lot of corruption in the practice of Hinduism in the later Vedic period, giving rise to general dissatisfaction and the birth of Buddhism and Jainism.

However we should recognize that Manusmriti is not Hinduism. It has got nothing to do with philosophy and everything to do with social segregation. It is similar to the distinction between Koran and Hadith (not that I am an expert on Islam).

However modern India has made a lot of progress and nobody cares about what Manu said and did. I personally never faced any caste discrimination and I have never seen any people being stopped from entering temples on the basis of caste.

 

[CHANDRU1849]

But the question still remains as why when even Jews and Zorastrians were given place and respect yet the Dalit was not allowed into a temple.

???????

I think the prohibition of Dalits entering temple is a recent phonomenon, probably after British invasion.

Saivism speaks very highly of Kannappa Nayanar and Nandhanar, both were probably from lower strata. Nandhanar episode spoke poorly of Dikshidhars and its influence still prevails.

This problem could have been totally eliminated after independence, by abolishing castes among Hindus, and reservation based on economic criteria. Due to poor forecasting by the leading lights of independence, the problem still surfaces.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Sri Sangom and tks,

posts # 13 and 16 are good. While Sangom's well researched and presented post gave reliable info tks in his post has questioned some of the conclusions sangom has drawn. I would like just add this:

Just as "ekaṃ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti" is a sentence from the ancient text quoted out of context by interested individuals to support whatever views they have, the sentences "aham brahmAsmi" and "tat twamasi" are also similar sentences frequently quoted out of context to support a certain pet viewpoint of individuals.​Thanks to Sangom for pointing out this.

 

[sarang]

Iwill even say manu's writ never ran in any part of india, because brahmins followed other vocations, non kshatriyas including shudras became emperors, and all must have practiced trade in some form. Teachers, administrators and literary writers were from all varnas. There are many smritis available now and many more extinct if the references quoted in each are to be taken into account. The kings gave grants of land and cattle only for those brahmins who learnt and preserved vedas and not to all brahmins. They had to earn their living by serving the king or the traders or the generals.

However modern India has made a lot of progress and nobody cares about what Manu said and did. I personally never faced any caste discrimination and I have never seen any people being stopped from entering temples on the basis of caste.