Page 13 of 27 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 266

Thread: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

  1. #121
    Join Date
    March 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by MahaHrada View Post
    ....To summarise my point the restrictions concerning varna that are described in the Vedas are in the context of a tradition that is almost extinct nowadays and one that was always only practised by a limited number of people of a certain community based on ethnicity and family.
    Yes MahaHrada, this is part of my argument, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

    Cheers!

  2. #122
    Join Date
    November 2007
    Age
    67
    Posts
    844
    Rep Power
    560

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by Nara View Post
    Yes MahaHrada, this is part of my argument, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

    Cheers!
    I think at the time the Upanishads were written the question of gotra did not have too much relevance since there was little desire or reason to practise and study the vedas outside of the specialised families, since every community was proud of its own religious or spiritual tradition and the resulting autonomy.

    That varna was not a very important qualification can be gauged not only from the fact that it is only once mentioned in the vedas in the purusha sukta, but also by other hints. It was not in the shruti proper that discrimination occurs but much later on.

    There is nothing wrong with specialization and autonomy it can be empowering and improve the whole society, we should probably restrict criticism to a lack of social mobility by rigidity of caste barriers, probably due to misuse of power and greed.

    So if we look at varna or jati we always have to consider the historical dimension, and the locality also, and research in what period or under what circumstances jati specializations becomes unfavorable as a societal model.

    Obviously there were times in the history of India when due to the jati system there was added flexibility of the society by allowing freedom and autonomy and diversity, even integrating, by the creation of new jatis, foreigners as useful and respected members of an all indian societal order while preserving the autonomy of other groups.

    A jati based system is non supremacist non invasive and therefore less authoritarian or autocratic and more tolerant and less destructive of minorities than egalitarian societies which tend to produce central goverments, and therefore in the end need violent methods of mass control, adherence to a centralistic ideology and dictatorship.

    We can watch how an egalitarian authoritarian muslim societal model (in bangladesh) has lead to the extinction or near extiction of the same tribal population that was protected and presevered by the empowering autonomy of the jati system in India which provided at least room for survival if not for a content life.

    My point is i doubt that the real important question is whether an egalitarian, uniform and therefore authoritarian society, is better than one based on diversity, freedom of individual expression of diverse communities, and specialization, but it is rather more important to discuss how to eliminate the cause of discrimination, supremacism, misuse of power, greed and other defects.

    Also when analysing societal models it is important to consider under what circumstances jati based specialisations are empowering and add to the flexibility and happiness or contentment of the members of the diverse communities and under what circumstances this model has disadvantages or is discriminating.

    It is shurely possible to find ways to improve both the authoritarian egalitarian model and the more anarchic diversity based jati societal models that allows a greater freedom and autonomy.
    Last edited by MahaHrada; 01 April 2010 at 10:46 AM.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by Nara View Post
    -----, Devotee also wondered whether these practices are valid today, even though he hedged with "I don't know". Whether these practices were valid in earlier times or not, I think they were not valid even in those times, and many here think they were, yet, you and I agree that they are not valid now as that tradition is almost extinct. Then, why not make a clean break. atanu says all of us are shudras, that is good, let the religious heads say this openly and say varna dharma is no longer valid in this kali yuga, we all are equal.

    Cheers!
    Namaste Shri Nara

    For Veda there is no earlier time and future time.

    If you think that varNa asrama dharma was not valid and is not valid then why you should exert so much to prove that it is a blot?

    Certainly we are all equal at the very fundamental level (which we know from scripture) but not at the level of particular desires, capabilities and functions, else our genetic make up would be same. Given some stimulus, all of us will react differently at some level or other. A plant has life, but plants are certainly different from men. One cannot force the same practises on plants and humans. The knowledge of four fold division of varNa is divine and primeval, and like the knowledge of saman (Lord equal in every one), this also is taught by the same Veda.

    Elsewhere, since continuity of soul is not known (or believed), the varNa is not linked with birth. But in no society at any time the Classes: I, II, II, and IV have been absent. And the same Dharma shastra that teaches varNa duties, itself identifies the kali yuga as different from other yugas and states that liberality will prevail in this yuga. Yet the same shastra teaches that varNa dharma duties remain eternal -- whether one knows or not is a different matter.

    If, based on analysis of conditions, i find that though born a Brahmin, i do not qualify, I am very satisfied with being a Sudra, since it frees me from a lot of responsibilities. I can just practise surrender and rest in peace. On the other hand, i cannot say that this is the universal feeling all around. So I will not say that the scripture is a blot and all should follow me.

    Einstein's science is not relevant for vast population. That does not make the Relativity theory irrelevant and a blot. It is directly relevant for those who make use of it but I cannot say that tomorrow it will not be relevant for me. The teaching of dharma shastra is for householders and is one of the ten branches of Vedic Dharma. It is valid and relevant fully for those who are placed by birth to follow it. But it may not be directly relevant for a Christian. Yet, being part of a Revolving system, a few aspirants will always cycle through this path to attain the ultimate knowledge that Self is all this.

    Om Namah Shivaya
    ,
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by Nara View Post
    Any system that requires birth lineage as part of his suitability to be a student is a blot to the society that uses that system.

    Peace…
    Nara,

    That is only true of non-Vedic "studies"; as that is probing into the phenomenal world and it goes only so far. For Vedic study, it has always been that unless one is ready to receive the knowledge of Brahman, one should not be allowed to study the Vedas, for they will only turn around and ridicule it. And, that is what is happening today! All sorts of uninitiated mlecchas are reading the Vedas and pontificating on it as if they are an authority (a la Michael Witzel and other dopes).

    I see that you agree with the fact that Varna is indeed based on birth but it also depends on guna and karma. The three are interlinked and cannot be made mutually exclusive. Plus, you have to look at this with a multi-life perspective. How can you do that if you claim to be a rationalist or scientist in the modern sense? They reject reincarnation simply because there is no physical proof.

    So are you of the contention that anyone, whatever be their lineage, should be allowed to be inducted into Vedic study? I suppose that would be the liberal, modern outlook but unfortunately that is not what is best. It is like saying anyone can become a scientist without the proper education, preparation, and discipline. Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    November 2007
    Age
    67
    Posts
    844
    Rep Power
    560

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by TatTvamAsi View Post
    Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.
    Valmiki was a highway robber and Narada (who was also not a Brahmin but nonetheless a Rishi) his Guru. In one story i remember Narada was disciple of a fisherman and son of a servant woman. Not that simple apparently. Except when Brahmins where engaged in robbing people at that time and worked as part time fisherman, which is not really a convincing explanation. Satyavati mother of veda vyasa was a fisher woman also. So Veda Vyasa was born from a mixing of caste! (and probably Narada also because he was educated in a brahmin household while being son of a maidservant)
    Last edited by MahaHrada; 01 April 2010 at 12:43 PM.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by MahaHrada View Post
    Valmiki was a highway robber and Narada (who was also not a Brahmin but a Rishi) his Guru. Not that simple apparently. Except when Brahmins where engaged in robbing people at that time, which is not really a convincing explanation
    Was Valmiki born a highway robber? His guna/karma in the early part of his lifetime led to his unfortunate occupation. Yet, his spiritual evolution was advanced enough that under the tutelage of his Guru, he was able to break all barriers.

    And, "Brahmins were engaged robbing people"? Where on earth did you get that? Finally, Valmiki, like Veda Vyasa, was an exception. It wasn't the norm for highway robbers to become sages! Nice try, but it is quite that simple!

  7. #127
    Join Date
    November 2007
    Age
    67
    Posts
    844
    Rep Power
    560

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by TatTvamAsi View Post
    Was Valmiki born a highway robber? His guna/karma in the early part of his lifetime led to his unfortunate occupation. Yet, his spiritual evolution was advanced enough that under the tutelage of his Guru, he was able to break all barriers.

    And, "Brahmins were engaged robbing people"? Where on earth did you get that? Finally, Valmiki, like Veda Vyasa, was an exception. It wasn't the norm for highway robbers to become sages! Nice try, but it is quite that simple!
    Now you said that only Brahmins are evolved enough to be Rishis so according to you there is no other option than double occupation by a part time "robber brahmin" to explain valmikis fate My point is not that it is or was the norm, but that there has been no rigid caste barrier all the time and there is always some amount of individual mobility in the jati system but it is more rarely desired or even needed than most people would think. It is to decide how much mobility in what kind of circumstances is of advantage for a society that is based on respect for diversity rather than enforcement of uniformity. Generally all communities are proud of their autonomy and do not necessarily accept that there is a fixed hierachy which focusses on the brahmins. So there is a great amount of flexibilityand mobility also in the interelation between jatis, no cemented rigid hierachical structure with the brahmin on top. Power was mostly wielded by kshatriyas and brahmans where often subservient. In kerala the local communities strived for a long time entirely without a brahmin population, they arrived at a later date, nonetheless it was a jati based societal model.
    Only in the earliest and simplest stage of the spiritual path in bharata dharma, that of the vedas and vedanta, birth in a brahmin household is needed as a qualification. In the higher darshanas laid down in the agamas and tantras, that contain and go beyond vedanta, there are other higher qualifications needed, since the agamas and tantras can be practised regardless of varna or jati and gender, few people need or desire birth as a male in a brahmin family to be competent to study and practise shrauta. There existed in the past agamic hindu kingdoms stretching into Cambodia or Indonesia (today Bali is still Hindu), that were religiously entireley managed by the local population in other words by Mlecchas, so there isn´t any need to be born in india to be qualified for the higher teachings, much less to be a brahmin.
    Last edited by MahaHrada; 01 April 2010 at 02:24 PM.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    March 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by TatTvamAsi View Post
    .... It is like saying anyone can become a scientist without the proper education, preparation, and discipline. Instead of a few years of study in the latter's case, the former needs lifetimes of maturing and evolution of the soul. Quite simple really.
    Greetings!

    It is not that simple as you say. The field of science is open to anyone. Right gotra is never a prerequisite.

    Cheers!
    Last edited by Nara; 01 April 2010 at 02:33 PM.

  9. #129

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by Nara View Post
    Greetings!

    It is not that simple as you say. The field of science is open to anyone. Right gotra is never a prerequisite.

    Cheers!
    Dear brother Nara, I am a 10th class dropout. Can I write a paper on big bang theory and claim discrimination if they reject my personal opinion on big bang? There is something called 'qualification' in science without which any tom dick or harry cannot claim to be a scientist. In a conference of scientists on global warming, only authorised people are allowed to enter. I cannot cry foul if they ban me from entering. If everyone are equal then even quaks and street ph.ds should be allowed to step on the real scientists.

    Similarly, the episode of Gautama is proof that anyone with qualification can become a student.
    Last edited by vivendi; 01 April 2010 at 07:25 PM.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Bhagavad Gita: Varna system misunderstanding

    Dear Nara,

    Quote Originally Posted by Nara View Post
    please see your post #102. At least to me it is nothing but ad hominem on steroids. I usually do not respond to such comments. If a person keeps repeating I stop even reading his/her posts. But, in your case, I thought you were just getting too emotional, but basically sincere.
    Ad hominem and that too on steroids ?? This is an example of taking things personally when it is not really so.

    My post draws all conclusions from your post alone. It is simply a derivative of your own post. Please see your post below where you claimed all this :

    The reason for inquiring about gotra is to ascertain whether Satyakama was born into a varna eligible for Vedic study. Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study. Given that Gautama asked about his Gotra shows that the truth-telling nature of brahamanas that he saw in the boy is traced to Satyakama's unknown Gotra.
    In your above analysis, you have distorted the meaning that the Upanishad tries to convey. Do you think that all Brahmins by birth speak only truth and never tell a lie ? Or do you think that Gautama Rishi was so much a dumb-headed sage who believed so ? Being born to a certain Kula and parents does give one a benefit of getting the right samskaras but it is not always so. Now in the above case, the mother is Sudra so the child can never be a born Brahmin ... that is settled by the Laws of Manu. So, considering or guessing that the child could be a born brahmin is simply ridiculous. In spite of this fact, Gautama admits him based on his qualities ... declaring him a Brahmin. What does that show ? It simply shows that real Brahmin is one who has the qualities of a Brahamin ... this is what Gautama believed in .... otherwise by no logic the child of a Sudra woman can be considered a born Brahmin.

    Please see the analysis made above which can be the only explanation of why Gautama accepted the child based on his guna alone. But you chose to ignore all this & claimed, "Furthermore, Gautama did not accept Satyakama because he spoke the truth, but because Satyakama's honesty showed to Gautama that Satyakama was a Brahmin boy, and therefore eligible for Vedic study.". So, are you not trying to read the mind of a Gautama a little too much with not so good intentions ?

    So, when I said in post 102, "Congrats for being able to read the mind of Gautama !" .... is it really an example of ad hominem ?

    Again you said for Jabala and about the social behaviour of people and maidservants of that time :

    This story shows how a poor woman is treated in a rich man’s house in such a society. Part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed.
    Can this conclusion be drawn from what Jabala said --- That "she was working in a rich man's house and part of her job was to serve the rich man's many guests in bed " ?? Where did you get all this ? Jabala simply said that she served many people in her youth and that is when Satyakama was born and she didn't remember who his father was ... that is all ! Based on this statement how are you drawing conclusions on social and sexual behaviour of all rich men with their maidservants ... and sexual behaviour of all maidservants of that time ??

    So, what is wrong when I remarked in my post 102 that "Perhaps, you were alive in Gautama and Jabala's time to claim all this ... as it is no where in the scripture !"

    And the worst of all, you claimed this too :

    At least one Brahmin availed of her services and thus was born Satyakama.
    Where did you get all this ? How are you able to claim the above which is not only baseless, imaginary but also a perverted remarks ?

    So, when I commented on the above and on the earlier quoted your own claims that :

    "You may also be knowing the names of men who slept with Jabala ? And the greatest part of it is that even though Jabala was unable to know who fathered Satyakama but you know it for sure that it was a Brahmin .... great ! You appear to have the finer details of Jabala's sexual behaviour and sexual encounters and their results !! That is really remarkable, sir !"

    How is it more than what you yourself claimed ?

    I am sorry if you felt hurt .... but I also felt hurt when you tried to present the distorted and perverted meaning from our revered scriptures. You want me to feel guilty over my remarks which are nothing but but a derivative of your own posts ... but on the other hand, are you ready to accept that you should not have tried to present a distorted meaning of our scriptures and that you should feel guilty for that act ??

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •