Kalavai Venkat
July 2006
The Hindu Renaissance
Source Link
Once, a Southern Baptist missionary was my co-passenger in a flight. Like every missionary out to seek a convert, he was pleasant. After learning that I am a Hindu he asked, “Is the caste system going away in India?” I quipped “Why should it go away?” He was surprised by my response and remarked, “You are the first Hindu who responded this way. Most Hindus agree that caste must go away and say that it is slowly going away.”
I decided to turn the tables on him. I asked him, “What language do the African Americans speak?” He replied, “English.” I asked, “What did their ancestors speak 500 years ago?” He began to contemplate. I thought that I might have to wait for eternity like the Christians have waited for the second coming of their messiah before the missionary would answer, so I prompted him, “Swahili? Hausa?” He agreed, “Yes.” I asked, “Do the African Americans worship the animist deities of their ancestors? Do they wed and bury per their ancestral customs?” The missionary replied, “No.”
I said that one could replace African Americans with any immigrant group: The Dutch, the Germans, the French or the Latinos. I added, “What you proudly advertise as the melting pot actually imposed the language, culture, religion and customs of the dominant ethnic group on all others. On the other hand, visit even a small village in India with just 300 families. The chances are that this population would be made up of 10 different castes and each of them retains its distinct religious, wedding, funerary, culinary and dialectic features. This is because, as a truly pluralistic society, the Hindu India allowed each ethnic group, regardless of how numerically small it was, to retain its identity.”
“So,” I added, “Caste is a result of this spirit of freedom and pluralism. It is something to be proud of. On the other hand, the so-called melting pot is actually a result of cultural, and often physical, extermination of diverse identities by one intolerant and powerful group.”
I continued to pontificate: “Like every other man made institution, caste too has been misused. Then, so has been every other man made institution like democracy or secularism. It was a democratically elected Hitler who exterminated 6 million Jews, Gypsies and mentally retarded patients. It was a democratically elected Jefferson who fixed the worth of every African American child at $ 22.50 and proposed to forcibly snatch them away from their parents and ship them back to Africa after ensuring that the adult African American population does not procreate any further. It was a democratically elected Roosevelt who declared that the extermination at the hands of the Whites was the best thing that happened to the Native Americans. Stalin and Mao were secular but they mercilessly sent millions to death camps.”
I asked him, “Is anyone demanding that democracy or secularism be abandoned because of a Jefferson, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin or Mao? Why should caste be abandoned just because it was misused? Hindus have systematically addressed caste inequities over the last 80 years or so. If we assume that we rid our society of all discriminations in the next 30 years, members of every caste, be it Brahmin, Kayastha, Maratha or Paraiyah could proudly say that they follow the millennia old religion, customs and dialects of their forefathers. Suppose the Christian West similarly resolves racial discriminations, could an African American, Dutch American or Latino make similar assertion?”
I pointed out that in the casteless Christian West, the minorities have been forced to abandon their identities and instead have been made to imitate the dominant group in every aspect of life such as religion, language, wedding and funeral customs. I cited the words of Nathan Katz and pointed out how Hindu pluralism, of which caste is an integral part, actually preserved minority customs. Katz, while discussing how the Jewish people flourished for centuries amidst the Hindus, writes:
"A crucial distinction between India and the rest of the Diaspora, however, is that in India acculturation is not paid for in the currency of assimilation. By acculturation I mean fitting comfortably into a society while retaining one's own identity, whereas by assimilation I mean that the loss of that identity is a perceived condition for acceptance. The study of Indian Jewish communities demonstrates that in Indian culture an immigrant group gains status precisely by maintaining its own identity. Such is the experience not only of India's Jews, but also of local Christians, Zoroastrians, and recently, Tibetan Buddhists. This striking feature of Indian civilization is reflected by each of these immigrant groups.
Now let us forget the Southern Baptist missionary and ask the Hindus: Would this preservation have been possible without the spirit of pluralism, which was ensured by the caste system? Are the Hindus going to repeat the missionary propaganda and deny the strengths of their own civilization or are they going to understand the institution of caste dispassionately? The missionary and the imperialist know that the institution of caste must be obliterated if the Hindu society were to be weakened and converted. A Hindu should critically analyze his traditions instead of uncritically absorbing propaganda.
So what's the answer? I don't have a clue on this one?
Last edited by leosprycat on Sun 10 Sep 2006 03:39; edited 1 time in total
As I've read the supposed Jewish communities in India are still in debate, and most of them appear to be imposters, just to immigrate to a fairly developed country like Israel.
It would be interesting to know if those Indian Jews are also Brahamin, Kayastha, etc. From what I have seen, they look like common indians.
Completely nonsense, a caste system makes specific groups more valued than others, one has a place in society from the moment he was born.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 168 } Location: Mid-Atlantic States; USA
Posted: Sun 10 Sep 2006 18:06 Post subject:
interesado wrote:
Completely nonsense, a caste system makes specific groups more valued than others, one has a place in society from the moment he was born.
Thanks. Yes (smile), that's what I've always heard and read; the injustice
of it all. That's why the good points cited, have me a bit confused as to
any possible redeeming qualities within the caste system worth saving,
small though they may be. Thanks for your thoughts on this. Much appreciated.
Posted: Mon 11 Sep 2006 04:21 Post subject: On the subject of Varnashrama dharma
One of the biggest mental stumbling blocks for any American to hurdle when considering whether to embrace Vaishnava-Hindu philosophy is India’s notorious caste system. To some it is an evil parallel to this country’s insidious racial classification system that positions whiteness on top with blackness on the bottom, with all the other so-called races relegated to intermediate positions. Nothing could be further from the truth, however.
The timeless Vedic literature describes a natural system of social organization that can bring about a peaceful society where everyone is happy. This system is called Varnashrama dharma, and while it serves as the basis for India’s current caste system, it is far different, without hint of racial prejudice.
The purpose of the Varnashrama social system is to provide a structure allowing people to work according to their natural tendencies and to organize society so that everyone, regardless of their position, makes spiritual advancement.
According to this philosophy, people can only work with a cooperative spirit if there is a central point of focus. Over the years proponents of many different political ideologies (e.g., Communism) have tried to unite society by providing such a central point. These attempts have all ultimately failed, though.
Generally, people work for their own pleasure, and this is sometimes extended to working for the family, the nation or even the whole world. Because the aims and aspirations of the members of society are so varied it is practically impossible to achieve a peaceful situation as everyone is working to fulfill his or her own personal goals.
The only universal point around which everyone can work is God. He provides an absolute, eternal center for all our activities. If we try to make something else the central point, the resulting society is doomed to fail.
The ancient Varnashrama system recognizes that there are many different types of people who may not be spiritually inclined. The society is thus organized under the direction of qualified brahmanas, spiritually gifted intellectuals, and is divided into four occupational and four spiritual divisions in such a way that everyone is serving God simply by performing their occupational duties. As the entire society is arranged to please God, anyone working within the society also pleases God, whether consciously or unconsciously.
The Varnashrama system recognizes the natural talents and abilities of each person and provides work according to a person’s qualities. There are four qualities of work. The brahmanas are the intellectual and priestly class. The kshatriyas are the government, the military and the administrative classes. The vaishyas are farmers and businessmen, and the shudras are workers.
There are also four spiritual divisions: brahmacharya or student life, grihastha or married life, vanaprastha or retired life and sannyasa or renounced life. As per Vaishnava teachings, if this system is properly implemented under the direction of qualified brahmanas, the result will be peace and prosperity throughout the world.
Varnashrama social divisions are based on qualities and work. If someone has the qualities of a brahmana, and if he works as a brahmana, he is accepted as a qualified brahmana. In this way, the Varnashrama system should not be confused with the corrupt caste system of India.
The current Indian system is akin to accepting the sons of a United States Supreme Court justice as Supreme Court justices themselves. Of course, that would be nonsense, as the individuals would have to be qualified. They have to attend and graduate from institutions of higher learning and pass bar exams, etc. Then they have to gain practical experience – usually as lawyers and judges on lesser platforms of jurisprudence -- before even being considered for a high court appointment.
In India, people often claim to be brahmanas simply because they are born into a brahmana family, even though they do not possess the qualifications or qualities of a brahmana. And in most cases they are not working as brahmanas either. The result of the corruption of the original system has been the destruction of the entire social structure in India, and, now, the rich tend to use the caste system to exploit and oppress the poor.
In the original Varnashrama society, however, all members are equally important. An analogy comparing the social body to the human body is instrumental in explaining this. The brahmanas are the head of the body, as they possess the intelligence and give directions to the other parts of the body. The kshatriyas are likened to the arms of the body, as their business as administrators and the military is to protect the social body from threats from outside (attacks from enemies) and disruption from within.
Vaishyas are likened to the stomach that provides energy to the body. The vaishyas, as the productive class, are the farmers and businessmen who produce and distribute food to the social body. The vaishyas are also responsible for protecting the cows – vitally important in a society that looks upon cows with reverence usually reserved for one’s mother. (Vedanta considers the cow to be essentially similar to our mother, because, in our infancy, our mother gave us cow milk to drink.)
Shudras are equated with the legs as they provide the manual labor required by the social body. We look after our whole body. It is not that we attend to problems affecting the head and neglect problems in the legs. The body works as a coordinated unit, and a problem anywhere in the body causes a disruption to the proper functioning of the whole body. When that happens we must immediately attend to that problem.
The social body should work as a coordinated unit with different members of the society acting in their respective positions as brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaishyas and shudras according to their qualities. The result would be a happy, peaceful and efficient society.
Even if you do not accept the premise that we are all born with different levels of intellect, different tendencies and inclinations, you have to accept that the varna system exists contemporarily in America almost exactly as described above. We have our own brahmana caste, i.e., religious leaders and empirical philosophers – the intelligent class/caste -- that offer sage advice to government and military leaders. The kshatriyas are the political and military leaders. The vaishyas are the captains of industry, and the shudras constitute the overwhelming bulk of the population – working class stiffs.
As I've read the supposed Jewish communities in India are still in debate, and most of them appear to be imposters, just to immigrate to a fairly developed country like Israel.
It would be interesting to know if those Indian Jews are also Brahamin, Kayastha, etc. From what I have seen, they look like common indians.
Completely nonsense, a caste system makes specific groups more valued than others, one has a place in society from the moment he was born.
There are different Jewish groups in India. And if one wanted to immigrate to a fairly developed country from India, one could simply immigrate to Canada, U.S.A, Geat Britain, or Australia. Israel isn't the only option, so it wouldn't be necessary to pass as a Jew.
Also, when certain Jewish groups from India tried to immigrate to Israel, they faced similar questions about their Jewishness that Ethiopian Jews faced in the 80s. This suggests that it isn't as easy to immigrate to Israel as some think.
Finally, the author claims that the caste system has been "abused", but if that's the case, it appears it has been abused since its inception. Just ask the Dalits or the lower-caste Hindus.
Now this sounds all PC and nice and tidy, but the reality is much different.
Yes, small minorities are able to retain their "culture", but unlike democratic systems - they are never allow to leave or progress. People who choose to convert Christianity (or any other religion) are persecuted. No upward mobility.
Now, the caste system is all gravy of you belong to one of the 'better castes', but like racism, the lower catses and their descendants, are forever reminded that they are BORN INFERIOR. It's karma or their fate.
Sorry, but I'd much rather live in a more pluralistic society. One in which an individual is free too convert or not and where one stands a chance of bettering oneself by stint of their own ingenuity, character and personal strength.
Joined: 28 Apr 2006 {Posts: 282 } Location: 51st State
Posted: Mon 11 Sep 2006 15:14 Post subject: Re: On the subject of Varnashrama dharma
chasbyrd wrote:
One of the biggest mental stumbling blocks for any American to hurdle when considering whether to embrace Vaishnava-Hindu philosophy is India’s notorious caste system. To some it is an evil parallel to this country’s insidious racial classification system that positions whiteness on top with blackness on the bottom, with all the other so-called races relegated to intermediate positions. Nothing could be further from the truth, however.
Caste system is to Vaishnava-Hindu philosophy as Nazism is to Nietzschean philosophy.
Quote:
Even if you do not accept the premise that we are all born with different levels of intellect, different tendencies and inclinations, you have to accept that the varna system exists contemporarily in America almost exactly as described above. We have our own brahmana caste, i.e., religious leaders and empirical philosophers – the intelligent class/caste -- that offer sage advice to government and military leaders. The kshatriyas are the political and military leaders. The vaishyas are the captains of industry, and the shudras constitute the overwhelming bulk of the population – working class stiffs.
One can accept structural castes or levels of functional arrangement within society, but mistreatment on the basis of color and/or caste privilede is incorrect.
Posted: Mon 11 Sep 2006 16:10 Post subject: Re: On the subject of Varnashrama dharma
chasbyrd wrote:
Varnashrama social divisions are based on qualities and work. If someone has the qualities of a brahmana, and if he works as a brahmana, he is accepted as a qualified brahmana.
Melani23 wrote:
Sorry, but I'd much rather live in a more pluralistic society. One in which an individual is free too convert or not and where one stands a chance of bettering oneself by stint of their own ingenuity, character and personal strength.
I think that this is it in a nutshell. Some people are comfortable with the notion that you are born into your place in life and should remain in that place, no matter your talents or your desires, and that you should neither perform functions outside of your place, associate with those outside of your place, nor marry outside of your place. Others (post-18th-century Westerners especially) dislike that worldview and prefer one where everyone can choose his or her own life, based on individual talent and desire. Are societies that compel people to remain in their born place better than those that encourage free individual choice? Up to you.
In fact, I notice that when modern-day Westerners defend the caste sysyem, they do it using the post-18th-century worldview. As Charles put it:
chasbyrd wrote:
the Varnashrama system should not be confused with the corrupt caste system of India. The current Indian system is akin to accepting the sons of a United States Supreme Court justice as Supreme Court justices themselves. Of course, that would be nonsense...
In short, Charles claims that the "true" Varnashrama system does not affix one for life based upon birth; that it encouages individual choice based upon individual talents. Contrast this with the defense argued by those who are not post-18th-century Westerners. They would argue that individual choice itself is evil, and that providence (god, society, nature, whatever) is best served when everyone sticks to his or her born place.
Now, the caste system is all gravy of you belong to one of the 'better castes', but like racism, the lower catses and their descendants, are forever reminded that they are BORN INFERIOR. It's karma or their fate.
This is why it is so hard to discuss Vedic philosophy in general or the Varnashrama social system in particular in the west. Vedanta posits that we live multiple lives (i.e., a belief in reincarnation) and that our pious or impious activities in this life dictate the kind of body we will have and the conditions in which we will have to live the next time around. In view of that, a shudra in this life could be reincarnated as, say, a kshatriya or vaishya in the next life.
Accordingly, anytime a soul is born into a hellish existence, it is because of past impious acts. While it is imperative for us to be compassionate to others -- particularly when they are suffering -- it is not inappropriate to offer a seemingly cold, sobering assessment of their anguish. You may remember the “hell” that a particular Jewish rabbi caught a few years ago when he insisted that Holocaust victims were reincarnations of sinners. (See: Israeli rabbi stirs uproar by saying Holocaust victims were reincarnated sinners)
Though many early Christian leaders such as Origin preached that the soul is immortal and spiritual, the church orthodoxy, in cahoots with the Roman government, nixed the idea of the preexistence of the spirit-soul. Without getting into the politics of the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. and the Fifth General Council of the Church in 553 A.D., it goes without saying that most westerners reject the notion of the transmigration of the soul, the notion that we have lived multiple lives and will live even more until we can rid ourselves of material attachments.
Additionally, most in the west reject the notion that karma dictates a person’s current situation.
Joined: 11 May 2005 {Posts: 84 } Location: New York
Posted: Tue 12 Sep 2006 18:29 Post subject:
chasbyrd wrote:
Melani23 wrote:
Now, the caste system is all gravy of you belong to one of the 'better castes', but like racism, the lower catses and their descendants, are forever reminded that they are BORN INFERIOR. It's karma or their fate.
This is why it is so hard to discuss Vedic philosophy in general or the Varnashrama social system in particular in the west. Vedanta posits that we live multiple lives (i.e., a belief in reincarnation) and that our pious or impious activities in this life dictate the kind of body we will have and the conditions in which we will have to live the next time around. In view of that, a shudra in this life could be reincarnated as, say, a kshatriya or vaishya in the next life.
But for this life the shudra must be contented with being a shudra. The Buddha had problems with this 2500 years ago. Where is the choice if you have to wait for a future life to see the effects of your “pious” life? How convenient for the upper castes.
Sorry Charles, but this is the best justification for preserving the caste system and one’s place in it.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Tue 12 Sep 2006 23:00 Post subject: Castas
Hi,
I have always wondered if the Indian "cast" system was in its origin "classist" or "racist". Well, classist it is, al least today. The idea that humans beings are predeterminated to a fixed place in the social scale is, without doubt, classist.
However, we should not forget that in the origins of India (if science does not prove wrong) there was an invasion of Aryan tribes which, very likely, have a different phenotype of local Indians. A cast system would be precisely what a racist society needed to isolate the population and prevent intermixture. Even today, 3500 years afterwards, one can perceive certain degree of "colorism" in India society.
What do you think about it? Is the origin of the cast system rooted in tribal racism of the Aryans?
Posted: Wed 13 Sep 2006 14:28 Post subject: Re: Castas
oevega wrote:
(if science does not prove wrong) there was an invasion of Aryan tribes which, very likely, have a different phenotype of local Indians.
sagascend wrote:
I hope you don't mean to support the very disputed theory that the Indian subcontinent was "invaded" by Nordic people.
There was a dramatic cultural change in the Indus valley about 3,750 yeas ago. The Dravidian civilization, exemplified by the great cities of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa and its (as yet untranslated) Dravidian language, vanished almost overnight. In the layers above Dravidian ashes is a new culture, characterized by Hinduism, Sanskrit writing, and the Indo-Aryan language which is the root of virtually all European languages today. Sanskrit records suggest that the conquerors, of Hindu religion and Indo-Aryan language, conquered and enslaved the non-Hindu Dravidian speakers, and that the subjugation was stabilized by the caste system.
Until recently, the archaeological consensus was that the Indo-Aryan-speaking conquerors were invaders from outside India. (Indeed, I wrote this myself on page 133 of Legal History of the Color Line.) But recent molecular evidence (available in our index of articles in the Molecular Anthropolgy forum) has overturned this idea. Instead, it now appears that the conquerors were home-grown, that they emerged from within India and that they rose to overthrow the Dravidian civilization from their source somewhere within the subcontinent. Judging by the subsequent spread of their genetic markers, as well as of their language, their culture then exploded out of India and spread throughout Europe and western Asia.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Wed 13 Sep 2006 14:40 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
oevega wrote:
there was an invasion of Aryan tribes which, very likely, have a different phenotype of local Indians.
I hope you don't mean to support the very disputed theory that the Indian subcontinent was "invaded" by Nordic people.
I don't know if they were locals, Persians or outsiders, but in the literature there are certain clues to think they look different from Dravidians, who where the civilizated peoples of earlier times. Once in a while there are references to pale people with eyes like lotto flowers (green eyes). The Aryans were related with the Western people, particularly because they spoke an Indo-European language, but also because certain tribal custums seem to be in tune with the ones of the Germanics and other Western groups. Westerns scholars (and also Nazis) has been fascinated with Indian because they keep records of those ancient customs. In certain parts of India, Pakistan and Afganistan, there are still people that is very pale and that look out of place in the Indian region.
So, if they feel distinct to the other peoples they lived with, it would not be strange (I believe) that the cast system was impossed to segregate the Aryans from the Dravidians in the first times.
But for this life the shudra must be contented with being a shudra. The Buddha had problems with this 2500 years ago. Where is the choice if you have to wait for a future life to see the effects of your “pious” life? How convenient for the upper castes.
Sorry Charles, but this is the best justification for preserving the caste system and one’s place in it.
Actually, I was describing the original system of Varnashrama dharma, not the current caste system, a perversion of the original. From my readings, people could "move up the ladder," so to speak, in one lifetime provided they studied the required spiritual materials and were judged worthy of advancement. Short of that, the emphasis was on encouraging people to perform their prescribed duties and offering all fruits of their labor (karma-yoga) to God/Krishna -- in hopes of attaining liberation in the current lifetime.
As to the works of Lord Buddha, here is an interesting article about his advent and just what he set out to do: BUDDHISM AND ITS VEDIC CONNECTIONS.
I have a question for Liam. Many years ago you told me that you were an atheist, following the tenets of South India's Theravada Buddhist sect that incorporates a "no-soul" doctrine. On the other hand, Tibetan and Mahayana Buddhists believe that the soul transmigrates. Does the atheistic essence of the Theravada sect inform your opposition to any formalized social structure – particularly one that places God at the center?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
