[Assam] Hereditary Caste System in India
Barua25
barua25 at hotmail.com
Fri Mar 24 14:59:05 PST 2006
If you can tell me why they don't change the religion to Islam or Christianity, but want to go to a Hindu temple even though they are not allowed admission, I will be able to tell you why they want to have the logun and come up to the highest caste.
Look at Assam, why they want to emulate Mumbai and want to change the name of the state although it does not make sense?
Same human psychology!
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Ram Sarangapani
To: Rajen Barua
Cc: Chan Mahanta ; assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Hereditary Caste System in India
>But I know the answer why they cannot.
I understand your position. But what is the answer as why they cannot?
My question is why the lower castes 'look up' to the brahmins? Why should they even take the names of Sarma or Goswami? Why are they trying to emulate the bamuns and want to take the logun?
It doesn't make sense.
>My only point was that caste system was hereditary even in the past
I think it is still that way. But it is not just the caste system. As I said before, it exists in practically every stream of modern India (and world) in many ways. We do confine ourselves to notions of 'Assamese identity' or 'Indian identity'. We confine ourselves to our languages, color, caste, religion etc, etc.
That is my take on this whole thing.
--Ram
On 3/24/06, Rajen Barua <barua25 at hotmail.com> wrote:
I will agree with you. My only point was that caste system was hereditary even in the past. Unless some proves otherwise, let us accept it and proceed.
Nobody is blaming the Brahmins. Brahmins did not start the caste system. In fact I am of the opinion that the practice caste system is more in the lower castes. But the Brahmins had their role. The lower caste can take control of things if they want to.
I will give an example. Lower castes will complain why only he Brahmins are allowed to take the 'logun'.
My answer is why the lower castes start taking 'logun' by their own appointed Brahmin and start writing Sarma, Goswami as their title? In stead of complaining Why the lower castes do something? Why the lower castes don't stop hiring Brahmin priest for their sraddha etc? Nobody is preventing them.
But I know the answer why they cannot.
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Ram Sarangapani
To: Chan Mahanta
Cc: Rajen Barua ; assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Hereditary Caste System in India
>*** No wonder therefore, the hereditary caste-system is at par with all of them
>who did and still do practise racism!
Hope you all don't mind my butting in.
What have these crafty Brahmins done now?
This thing about heredity is NOT confined just to Brahmins, is it?
Lets look:
Assamese don't (normally) marry outside their language. Heck they don't even marry other Assamese known as Kukis, Ahoms or Koch, Boros - exceptions don't prove the rule.
Most Assamese don't marry below their caste (and we are not talking about Brahmins only here)
And this phenomenon is NOT just confined to Assamese. Its done and redone all over India (including our educated NRAs and other NRIs).
So, what does all this point out? Every damn thing is hereditary. If you are born Bengali, you confine yourself to marring another Bengali. If you born a Kalita (or a Mahanta) its unlikely they will marry below their caste or language.
Exceptions aside, we are all 'guilty' of being extensions of traditions and heredity. Why are we singling out only the Brahmins here?
How many of us (on this net) can claim NOT to be tied down by extensions of traditions or heredity? Once again netters see this thinly veiled garb, holier than thou rear its head.
--Ram
On 3/24/06, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net > wrote:
>One thousand years before Mahabharata and Bhagavadgita, Chandogya Upanishad carried the wonderful story of Satyakama where an illegitimate son of a slave woman was accepted as a brahmin. Later Satyakama became the principal hymn writer in Chandogya Upanishad. His disciple, Upakoshal, saw the famous truth "Sky is Love" yadeva kham tadeva kam iti.
*** No I don't think that is what I read Rajen. If the anecdote is accurate ( forgive the oxymoron nature of the point ) , then the 'slave woman' --who not a Brahmin, gave birth to the illegitimate Satyakam, who was accepted as a Brahmin.
But you are right that it does not tell anyone WHY Satykam was accepted as a Brahmin. Perhaps because the man who sired him was a Brahmin? Certainly not on his own merit, which became known only much later, when he became the principal hymn-writer. Which of course vindicated those who accepted him as a Brahmin to begin with. The anecdote was recorded probably for the vindication of those who committed the transgression ( more than likely wayward Brahmin supporters of the wild-oats sowing father) of accepting Satyakam as a Brhmin, in spite of being born of a 'slave',
>In spite of all scriptural clarification, Hindus in India cannot get rid of the immovable yoke of hereditary caste system. It is very important to study the cause.
>The causes of hereditary caste system appear to be the same as those of racialism all over the world.
*** No wonder therefore, the hereditary caste-system is at par with all of them who did and still do practise racism!
What is your problem Rajen :-)?
At 10:38 AM -0600 3/24/06, Rajen Barua wrote:
<One thousand years before Mahabharata and Bhagavadgita, Chandogya Upanishad carried the wonderful story of Satyakama where an illegitimate son of a slave woman >was accepted as a brahmin. Later Satyakama became the principal hymn writer in Chandogya Upanishad. His disciple, Upakoshal, saw the famous truth "Sky is Love" >yadeva kham tadeva kam iti.>
Funny thing is do you know what is the fallacy even of this one example.
The fallacy is the SON is accepted as a BRAHMIN because HIS MOTHER, a slave woman, MUST BE A BRAHMIN BECAUSE SHE WAS TELLING THE TRUTH.
The son was not accepted as a Brahmin because of his own merit, but because of his mother's merit.
So this prove that a BRAHMIN'S SON IS A BRAHMIN.
That is the hole I was talking about.
I wonder why Hindu scholars donot see this hole in the example?
Again, let someone prove me dumb and wrong.
Rajen
----- Original Message -----
From: Chan Mahanta
To: Rajen Barua
Cc: assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Hereditary Caste System in India
But Rajen,
<One thousand years before Mahabharata and Bhagavadgita, Chandogya Upanishad carried the wonderful story of Satyakama where an illegitimate son of a slave woman was accepted as a brahmin. Later Satyakama became the principal hymn writer in Chandogya Upanishad. His disciple, Upakoshal, saw the famous truth "Sky is Love" yadeva kham tadeva kam iti.>
*** Don't you get it? Isn't that a perfect example of the REAL Hinduism's goodness?
Now don't go about arguing that it is one in a million exception to the rule.
In fact I will add one more fine example: President Kalam was adopted by Tamil Brahmins--and look what he turned out to be! Will you take issue with that too?
<A Brahmin, the so called highest caste of Hindus, is defined as a person with a heart as pure as a newborn baby. This proves that all newborn babies are Brahmin.>
*** See, another awesome bit of reasoning here. Again it is them bad guys who would not allow, even the BRAHMIN newborn of a Dalit to enter a temple, no doubt guarded against invasion by untouchables by people with hearts as pure as those of the newborn--Brahmin priests.
<In modern India, democracy is ruined by caste-oriented vote-banks practiced by the political parties. >
*** And mind you, these are of a PARTICULARly nasty ilk of politicians! Take a wild guess on WHO they are!
Very, very skeptically yours,
c :-)
At 9:28 AM -0600 3/24/06, Rajen Barua wrote:
Himenda:
I am yet to find a Hindu scholar who would say that Caste was hereditary in past. Everybody, starting from Radhaksrishnan and all, try to defend the position that the caste system was actually NOT hereditary in the past citing examples like you did.
But till now nobody could convince me that it was NOT hereditary. Frankly speaking I can see the holes in the very examples you cited. I think all the Hindu scholars will call me a dumb guy, but I always ask the following dumb question to the defenders of the case to prove that the caste system was NOT hereditary in the past:
Question:
If caste system was NOT hereditary at some point in the past, then there must have been a system in vogue sometime in the past to regulate the caste system so that it does not become hereditary. A system like say at the age of (5, 10, 12 you name it) the boy or girl is taken to a test (like the Mandarins in China) where they are tested and someone is declaring "OK, you become a Brahmin, you become a Sudra etc.' If you think carefully, without such a Mandarin system in vogue, caste system will have to be hereditary.
Now out of the million written words, stories, upakhyans in so many Hindu Kabya, Mahalkbaya, Purans etc can anyone can show me one single incident which will indicate that such a system ever existed in India.
So far nobody could show me. But there may be such instances. But as I told you I am a dumb guy. Show me where is the beef.
I think we should accept whatever it was in the past and move on. But we should not try to defend something which is not true.
But I amy be wrong. I would like to see someone proving that I am wrong.
That will be an enlightenment.
Rajen Barua
From: Himendra Thakur
To: Barua25 ; Ram Sarangapani ; umesh.sh05 at post.harvard.edu
Cc: hthakur at comcast.net ; assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:02 PM
Subject: Hereditary Caste System in India
Dear Rajen, Ram and Umesh,
As regards hereditary caste system, please consider the frollowing few points:
Out of many verses of Rikveda, the famous twelfth verse of the Purusha Sukta of Rikveda sounds non-typical:
brahmana asya mukham asit bahu rajanyakah kritah
ubdha tat asya yad vaishyah padbhyam sudrah ajayata
"brahmin became his mouth, kshatriya (became his) arms, vaishya (became his) thighs, sudra was born from the feet" …
The distinctive use of the words "became" (asit) and "born" (ajayata) indicates that this verse is not typical of most of the allegorical descriptions in Rik Veda verses. Some scholars [I am still seeking the reference] opine that this verse was added to Rik Veda at a later time by interested parties. On the other hand, the creation of the castes is described in a different way in Shatapatha Brahmana (2/10/11) or Taittiriya Brahmana (3/12/9/2) where the sudra caste is not mentioned at all.
More accurately, at another place in Rik Veda (9/112), we hear the rishi :
" … job of all persons cannot be the same. A carpenter straightens wood, a physician looks after a patient, and a singer seeks the priest. Look at me ! I am a hymn-writer, my son is a physician, and my daughter is a cook …"
Bhagavadgita is absolutely clear (4/13) that the four castes were created according to guna and karma (aptitude and job) … definitely not according to birth. The verses 41-44 in chapter 18 are description of the different natural aptitudes of different people, not a justification of the hereditary caste system.
A Brahmin, the so called highest caste of Hindus, is defined as a person with a heart as pure as a newborn baby. This proves that all newborn babies are Brahmin. This is supported by the verse in Mahabharata (Shanti Parva Chapter 188):
na visheshah asti varnanam sarvam bhahmam idam jagat
brahmana purvasristam hi karmabhih varnatam gatam
"There is nothing so special about the hereditary castes. At the beginning, everyone is a Brahmin. Castes come up later according to job."
One thousand years before Mahabharata and Bhagavadgita, Chandogya Upanishad carried the wonderful story of Satyakama where an illegitimate son of a slave woman was accepted as a brahmin. Later Satyakama became the principal hymn writer in Chandogya Upanishad. His disciple, Upakoshal, saw the famous truth "Sky is Love" yadeva kham tadeva kam iti.
GROUND REALITY OF HEREDITARY CASTE SYSTEM TODAY:
In spite of all scriptural clarification, Hindus in India cannot get rid of the immovable yoke of hereditary caste system. It is very important to study the cause.
The causes of hereditary caste system appear to be the same as those of racialism all over the world.
In modern India, democracy is ruined by caste-oriented vote-banks practiced by the political parties. Unimaginable violence and cruelty are committed in the name of caste. Dowry system, that causes bride-burning in many cases, flourishes in the system of arranged marriage, which is a direct consequence of hereditary caste system.
I think Inter-caste marriage, based on love and commitment between the couples, will eliminate the twin-headed monster of hereditary caste system and dowry system in India.
With the best wishes,
Himendra
----- Original Message -----
From: umesh sharma
To: Rajen Barua ; Ram Sarangapani
Cc: assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] HPI, March 20, 2006
Rajen-da,
Even this verse by itself doesnot say that Brahmin is by birth - it merely states that Brahmins are intellectuals (from head or brain) - thus does show that intellect is superior to other things - if you believe that one part of human body is more important than others. Kshatriya is said to come from arms - denoting strength -used for fighting -does not say about hereditary caste system.
On the other hand it speaks of cohesion - in the sense that all people in any soicety are doing equally important work - just as parts of a human body - regardless of their social status. I repeat - no mention of hereditary caste system.
Umesh
Rajen Barua <barua25 at hotmail.com> wrote:
I think it is the Gita.
I will check
Rajenda
----- Original Message -----
From: umesh sharma
To: Rajen Barua ; Ram Sarangapani
Cc: assam at assamnet.org
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] HPI, March 20, 2006
I do recall that there is such a verse but I do not recall seeing it in Geeta or that Krishna said it.
Umesh
Rajen Barua <barua25 at hotmail.com> wrote:
I will have to read the verse in detail. I think Krishna states bothways:
Those who are born out of my head are the Brahmins
Those who are born out of my shoulder, are the Kshatriyas.
Those who are born out of my stomach are the Vaishya.
Those who are born out of my feet are the Sudras.
Can you check if above is true.
Rajenda
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam at assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam at assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20060324/41177d9e/attachment.htm>
More information about the Assam
mailing list