Brahmanas and Sudras
From Tulasi Ramayana
Aranya Kanda 32-33 Addressing a Gandharva (Kabandha resurrected as Gandharva)
Sri Rama said: Listen, O Gandharva, to what I tell you: I cannot tolerate an enemy of the Brahamanas (Brahmins). He who without guile in thought, word and deed does service to the Brahmanas (the very gods on earth), wins over Brahma, Siva, Myself and all other divinities.
A Brahmana, even though he curses you, beats you or speaks harsh words to you, is still worthy of adoration: so declare the saints. A Brahmana must be respected, though lacking in amiability and virtue; not so a Sudra, though possessing a host of virtues and rich in knowledge.
Brahma-Sutras 1-3-36:
Because purificatory ceremonies are mentioned (in the case of the twice born) and their absence are declared (in the case of the Sudras).
[Note:** Purificatory ceremonies like Upanayana (Sacred Thread) etc. are declared by the scriptures** to be a necessary condition of the study of all kinds of knowledge or Vidya; but these are meant only for the higher castes (Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas). Their absence in the case of the Sudras is repeatedly declared in the scriptures. "Sudras do not incur sin (by eating prohibited food), nor have they any purificatory rights " etc. (Manusmrti 10-12-6). Consequently **they are not entitled to the study of the Vedas.]
**THE MAHABHARATA, UDYOGA PARVA
sec.XXIX
KRISHNA Says: The following are the duties declared for a SUDRA from the olden times. He should serve the Brahmanas and submit to them;** should not study**; sacrifices are forbidden to him; he should be diligent and be constantly enterprising in doing all that is for his good. The king protects all these with proper care, and sets all the castes to perform their respective duties.
If there are specific verses you need explanations for, pls post those verbatim (instead of posting interpretations/translations by some so called Western experts) & I can explain :hoonh:
Does Hinduism support Caste system?
Hinduism does not support caste system. The focus of Hinduism is on the individual and his salvation not on his caste or its privileges. Scholars tend to quote the Purushasukta as the basis for the emergence of caste system. There are also references to caste system in the Bhagavad gita. But for a serious student of History, it becomes obvious that these references appear to be deliberate manipulations and later day interjection intended to justify a system that was otherwise fully unjustified. The Manusmriti, in the form that is available today did more damage to Hinduism and the self esteem of many Hindus than Islam and Christianity.
Hindus should be clearly aware of the distinction between a sacred scripture (shruti) and a book written by an individual (smriti) such as Manusmriti. Manusmriti was probably edited and reedited a hundred or thousand times by different scholars during different periods. It is time Hindus realize this and stop castigating Hinduism on the basis of this grotesquely tampered scripture. It is time they examine their thinking and take some positive steps to create a more equitable and dignified human society based on a new manava dharma shastra based on present day values and ideals.
Caste System was created by people . It was a form of racism where light colored people from Middle East and Central Asia and Europe mistreated dark skinned people originally from Indian subcontinent. They added this to the Religion.
'Ancestral North Indians' (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the 'Ancestral South Indians' (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other.
The social stratification existed right from early human divergence, some 50,000-60,000 years ago when initial settlement happened in India.
If you would read my posts you would know which verses I am refering to. I already posted the verses the author of the article which started this thread used. Then Diwana just posted a few verses a couple of posts back. Please explain those.
Caste System was created by people . It was a form of racism where light colored people from Middle East and Central Asia and Europe mistreated dark skinned people originally from Indian subcontinent. They added this to the Religion.
'Ancestral North Indians' (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the 'Ancestral South Indians' (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other.
The social stratification existed right from early human divergence, some 50,000-60,000 years ago when initial settlement happened in India.
Sir since you started this thread be kind enough to reply to my posts which questioned the validity of the verses used in the article you posted. I want to discuss this in the light of verses in Hindu scriptures not apologetic articles concocted to sway ones attention away from the scriptures and what they are saying. Please comment on the verse that have been posted in this thread.
What you have posted are inaccurate English translations of the verses from some scriptures done by someone not qualified to do so.
Post the actual verses and then we can discuss. Discussion based on inaccurate English translations are meaningless.
Here is an example -
Correct translation -
Though they are blinded by greed and do not see evil in the destruction of the family or sin in being treacherous to friends, why we, who clearly see evil in the destruction of the family, should not think about turning away from this sin, O Krishna? (1.38-39)
Eternal family traditions and codes of moral conduct are destroyed with the destruction of (the head of the) family in a war. And immorality prevails in the family due to the destruction of family traditions. (1.40)
And when immorality prevails, O Krishna, people become corrupted. And when people are corrupted, unwanted progeny is born. (1.41)
This brings the family and the slayers of the family to hell because the spirits of their ancestors are degraded when deprived of ceremonial offerings of love and respect by the unwanted progeny. (1.42)
The subtle difference in translation makes a big difference in the message being conveyed.
What I have posted does not spell a meaning much different from what you have posted. The essence is the same discussing adulterous relations and the harm family values based on it.
I have no qualms going with the translation of your choice. Now explain to me why the author of the article posted to initiate this thread uses these to justify there is no caste system in Hinduism. This is what I had objcted to yet no clarification has been provided.
I am copying this using the reference you have provided:
I created the four divisions of human society based on aptitude and vocation. Though I am the author of this system of division of labor, one should know that I do nothing directly, and I am eternal. (See also 18.41) (4.13)
Its clear from this verse that in Hinduism the society is divided into four different strata based on the type of work they do in society. There is no denying that. I have nothing against this either given that in ancient times occupations were not as diverse and different as they are today where there are countless strata of disciplines. These four strata were called Brahmins, Kashtaryas, Veshas and Shudras. Today its difficult to divide society into four stratas based on their type of work.
Now the question arises whether these strata in hinduism were strictly based on work or were they also considered socially different strata as it appears today among Hindus. Can a person in one strata jump into another strata in Hinduism? Or were they socailly bound to be enslaved to one strata for their entire life.
The division of human labor into four catagories is also based on the qualities inherent in peoples’ nature or their make up. (See also 4.13) (18.41)
In the ancient Vedic system, activities of human beings were categorized into four social orders, based on the three modes of material Nature. These four orders are often mistaken for the caste system of modern times in India and elsewhere that is based on birth only. These four, universal, social orders of human society, as described by Lord Krishna, relate to persons’ nature, quality, and work, not their birth. Those who were dominated by the mode of goodness and were peaceful and self-controlled were called Braahmans. Those who were controlled by passion and preferred to engage in administration and protective services were labeled Kshatriyas. Those under the mixed modes of passion and ignorance, engaged in farming and trades, were called Vaishyas. Those mostly in the lowest mode of ignorance were called Shudras, and their nature was to serve the other three social orders.
The Vedas compare human society with a person whose four main limbs represent the four broad types of works and workers in society. The Vedas also state that their words are for all mankind, for all people (YV 26.02). **There are only two types (or castes) of people ¾ the decent and the indecent (Gita 16.06). **
Intellectuals who have serenity, self-control, austerity, purity, patience, honesty, transcendental knowledge, transcendental experience, and belief in God are labeled as intellectuals (Braahmans). (18.42)
** A Shudra is a person who is ignorant of spiritual knowledge and identifies with the material body due to ignorance. According to Lord Krishna, these four designations or types are not determined by birth. A Shudra-type person may be born in any family. The results of one’s previous activities or Karma return as one’s nature and habits. **
I do not think you can fool people by submitting articles written to hide the real weakness in hinduism by trying to change the essence of these scriptures.
These scriptures and their followers caused humiliation to millions of people over the periods of centuries…and sadly still present in Indian society.
Fact remains, Hinduism divides people in groups and as the article stated, it has caused worst damage to humanity than any other unjust society or tradition.
There was a reason why Gandhi had to ask permission to go abroad to study law.
There is a reason why a Brahman can beat the other lower caste people and still be worthy of being served and respected…itsHinduism and its scriptures
which have no logic behind dividing people in lower or upper classes. ](http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_caste.asp)
Try giving your answers PIUSA on what is presented and we will start with other Hinduism teachings which are illogical, harmful and humiliate people based on other reasons.
Caste system is not a misconception, its the sad reality of Hinduism.
No wonder, laws were then implemented by people to try to abolish these heinous practices and yet people break those laws in the pretext of following these Hindu scriptures.
If a Mullah tells misguided folks that if they kill innocent Kafirs they would go to heaven and get 72 virgins because thats what it says in the Quran, is it a fault of the Mullah or of the Quran ?
I hope you get the point
For an explanation of the caste system, see post # 33
If a Mullah tells misguided folks that if they kill innocent Kafirs they would go to heaven and get 72 virgins because thats what it says in the Quran, is it a fault of the Mullah or of the Quran ?
I hope you get the point :)
For an explanation of the caste system, see post # 33
You selectively quoted my post and answered with irrelevant topic. It had nothing to with heaven or hell or whatever.
Answer my post which is here again.
"I do not think you can fool people by submitting articles written to hide the real weakness in hinduism by trying to change the essence of these scriptures.
These scriptures and their followers caused humiliation to millions of people over the periods of centuries....and sadly still present in Indian society.
Fact remains, Hinduism divides people in groups and as the article stated, it has caused worst damage to humanity than any other unjust society or tradition.
There was a reason why Gandhi had to ask permission to go abroad to study law.
There is a reason why a Brahman can beat the other lower caste people and still be worthy of being served and respected....itsHinduism and its scriptureswhich have no logic behind dividing people in lower or upper classes."
Let me add here,
Hinduism divides people in to groups based on illogical and false reasoning.
I was waiting for you to pick up the mistake of our brother USResident, but you did not pick it up. Rather you have fallen into the same hole that he fell into.
USResident
Please read the first post again and see that the article writer is agreeing with you. You said that you fail to see what verse 1:41 has to do with the caste system. In actual fact it does not have anything to do with the caste system. The article writer said that this verse however is misrepresented and used by the anti-hindu caste people to show how Hindu scriptures grade humanity. But on many levels this verse does not show this. You are actually agreeing with the article writer except that he did not seem to pick up on the fact that it has nothing to do with the caste system anyway. Now our brother Punjabee in USA justs wants to argue with you telling you that your translation is wrong but he does not realise what it is you are saying …
Correct me if I am wrong but you saying “This verse cannot be used to support the idea of inequality of castes, because it is not even about the caste system”
PIU on the other hand is saying that it is about the caste system, which in my view is doubly wrong.
The other thing is that the Hindu scriptures are amongst the hardest to understand and they are written as narratives, quoting the words of people in dialogue. The context extends further than just a few passages before or after the given verses.
Firstly I believe like the article writer that Hindu scriptures are on the most part wrongly interpreted by many Hindus and I also believe we should separate Hindu tradition from Hindu creed. I insist that the majority of “higher” classes have taken advantage of the lower classes by not allowing them to learn the scriptures not because the people are “religiously unclean” but because they would not want them to find the truth in them.
Now looking at the Baghwad-Gita … The verses that are written in Chapter 1 37 through to the end of Chapter 1 should be read in a certain frame of mind … Here it is to summarise …
Arjun stands on the battlefield he is talking to Krishn (his advisor) using his logic and reasoning skills convincing himself that he should not fight. On the other hand Krishn listens carefully and in Chapter 2 comes up with a devasting rebuttal to the reasoning of Arjun. Telling him that he should fight.
The texts in verses you have quoted are all the words of Arjun using his reasoning to deny fighting on the battlefield. In response to these words Krishn asks him (On the authority of God) My dear Arjun how have these impurities come upon you? 2:2
So not only is the verse 1:41 not talking about the caste system (yes it’s context is talking about the respect of dynasty and maintaining lineage ties and familial relations) but it is not even part of the word or wisdom of God according to the narrative itself it is Arjun finding excuses not to fight. Those verses could not be used as rulings if they were in Islamic scriptures.
No, I am not saying that it is about the caste system, hence my point about inaccurate translation.
I agree with the rest of your post :)
Peace Punjabee in USA
It is good to see that we agree on the most part. For the other part hopefully you will agree with me further ... I just wanted to say that USResident is also saying that the verse 1:41 is not about the caste system, so you are arguing with a person who is actually agreeing with you.
We can talk about other verses afterwards I hope everyone agrees that 1:41 is not about the caste system and the article writer should have made this clear in his article.
