[Assam] caste system

[Rajib Das]

Another question:

1. Isn't the concept of Jati distinctly different from
that of Varna in its original sense? And that Jatis
were codified under the Varna system only as late as
the 19th century? I have read somewhere - and this
might be wrong - that this codification started under
Islamic rulers and was finally firmed up by the Brits.
And that this firming up was more about political axes
to grind than anything else.

And is it possible that Jatis (or clans) moved Varnas
depending on what the clan leaders had accomplished
very much in their physical lives?


--- "Roy, Santanu" <sroy at mail.smu.edu> wrote:

> Dear Rajib: 
> I cannot answer all of your questions. I can see
> that some of them are
> rhetorical. There are others I really don't know the
> answers to.But I
> can try to put some kind of response for a few. 
> 
> 2. Does Varnashrama Dharma refer specifically to and
> only to the 4 castes and the 4 ashramas - or does it
> posit on a bigger spiritual and philosophical
> canvas?
> 
> SR: As I understand it, the 4 castes are
> inextricably tied to the reward
> and punishment structure posited by karma and
> rebirth. If you do very
> well, you will be reborn as a higher caste. If you
> do very badly, you
> may become a shudra or even worse, born as an
> animal. In each life, you
> pay or reap the rewards for your earlier lives.
> Therefore, you should
> accept your current station in life as a temporary
> state and abide by
> the bondages dutifully so that you can rise up in
> later lives. And if
> you do this very very well, you may even escape the
> cycle of birth and
> death some day. 
> 
> 2. Varna finds its mention in the Rig Veda all
> right.
> But do the Vedas themselves specify that the Varnas
> are defined by birth? Or did it come much later with
> the likes of Manu? And if the Varna system were not
> to
> be defined by birth but by someone's desire, will
> and
> action, would it change anything in the way we
> percieve things about Hinduism?
> 
> SR: Answer to last question: it would. It would
> screw up the incentive
> system tied to cycles of life and death as posited
> in the early
> scriptures. 
> 
>  
> 6. Since Islam has always had a bloody history right
> from the time of when the transition of leadership
> was
> to happen from the prophet to his disciples and
> since
> it has enough mention in the Koran of killing of
> kufrs, should it be called "Unsalaam" or something
> and
> should Muslims reject Islam in its entirety?
> 
> SR: Islam is very much face to face with the
> contradictions between some
> of its core narrative and the values of modern
> society. This is the
> basic clash of civilizations we are supposed to be
> in the midst of. 
> 
> 7. Should Christianity with its reference to
> slavery,
> keep continuing to celebrate slavery - after all it
> was ONE of the tenets expounded in the Bible and
> therefore you cannot ignore it and ipso facto, a
> Christian must reject the Bible in its entirety?
> 
> SR: I don't know much about this. The New Testament
> in effect does
> reject some of the tenets of the old testament. I am
> not aware of
> slavery being a central tenet of Christian faith at
> any point of time. I
> thought Christians themselves were enslaved and fed
> to lions in the
> first few centuries after Christ. As a
> philosophical, the Christian
> doctrine does not - as far as I am aware - propose
> slavery as a crucial
> element in the chain of earth and heaven.  I'd like
> to hear more about
> this. However, there are other aspects of core
> Christian tenets that may
> be in contradiction to modern life. Homosexuality,
> premarital sex,
> divorce and so on.  
> 
> 9. Why is the option of plainly denying the
> existence
> of "all these aspects" the only other way? Did any
> one
> of us really grow up with our parents teaching us
> the
> gunas of the Varnashrama system? Or did we really
> look
> forward to the excitement of Durga Puja and other
> religious/social events? Has anyone denied my right
> to
> a Hindu religion when I married a Brahmin woman?
> 
> SR: The question you ask is whether you are still a
> Hindu (or why not)
> even though you may have violated or not believed in
> all this stuff.
> Nobody told you that you are not. I think this is
> not sufficient. 
> 
> More so, why would not a re-interpretation of the
> meaning of Varna (I assume no one has problems with
> Ashrama) be in the order of things? Or even the
> rejection of it?
> 
> After all there were enough reformers within the
> Hindu
> fold (and even Buddha wasn't exactly outside the
> Hindu
> fold in his life, was he?) who had enough following
> through the times to change things. 
> 
> SR: You are probably arguing in effect for a new
> philosophical system
> that is more in accordance with your view of life.
> That is a new
> religion. You may not call it so. 
> 
> 
> 10. And why should we forget what our forefathers
> did
> to our religion? Why should our kids not learn that
> there was for the longest time in history (and still
> is) such gross injustice within our religious and
> social order that things needed to change? And why
> would they not accept it as a part of the bad they
> inherit in as much as all the good they could? 
> 
> 
> 
> If such were the logic then the Christians and
> Muslims
> would have an even tougher time defending their
> religions to their children, wouldn't they?
> 
> SR: They do. It will become harder over time. We too
> should have a hard
> time. My point is that some people are in denial.
> They don't want to
> have a hard time. I am glad you are not in that set.
> 
> 
> Take care-
> 
> Santanu-da. 
> 
> 
> --- Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
> 
> > >The other option is to gloss over and plainly
> deny
> > the existence of 
> > >all these >aspects (as many on this net do) and
> > then to march 
> > >forward with a very >selective view of Hinduism
> > that is in 
> > >consonance with modern society and >liberal
> values.
> > The trouble with 
> > >this approach is that in all honesty, you >cannot
> > be very sure of 
> > >what it is you are clutching on to & therefore,
> in
> > the >long run, 
> > >are bound to run into certain contradictions -
> > perhaps as 
> > >your >children question you....
> > 
> > 
> > *** Well said Santanu. But I am not sure the
> > inquisitive children are 
> > enough  of a deterrence to that attempt at living
> in
> > a make-believe 
> > world. I have seen 'children' of those who would
> > choose to live in a 
> > delusion, raised, indoctrinated and molded in the
> > image of their 
> > parents :-), who grow up perfectly willing  to
> > perpetuate the myths 
> > and the delusions.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com