Varna system

[Guest guest]

Message: 12

 

Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:32:46 -0000

 

"Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran

 

Does Varna system resemble the present day Caste System?

 

 

 

advaitin, V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v

 

wrote:

>

> Pranams to all. The question of varna system being different

 

from the present caste system did not arise to me. The traditional

 

school in which I was trained did not seek to make such a

 

distinction.

 

 

 

Namaste Sri Subbu:

 

 

 

I may agree with you if your statement contains the condition that

 

some aspects of Varna System and present day caste system have

 

similarites. Both an elephant and a donkey have 4 legs, a tail, and a

 

body. Can we make the conclusion that they are the same? Identical

 

twins may be considered equal at the time of their birth but when

 

they grow from childhood to adulthood, they acquire distinct

 

characteristics (Gunas). There is famous saying to the effect that

 

the purity of the water is determined not through its origin: the

 

greatness of a Rishi is also not determined on basis of his birth

 

origin.

 

 

 

I do come from a traditional Vaideeka family but I will not accept

 

that a child born in lower caste is inferior to my own child. I

 

believe that all Children are divine and they are His gift. Lord

 

Krishna in Bhagavad Gita declares in chapter 10, verse 30

 

that "Praklad, the demon by birth is Me!"

 

 

 

Warmest regards,

 

 

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

 

 

Namaste Sri Ram ji:

First, pl. pardon me for the delay in responding. I was thinking of a

situation like this: Supposing there is a boy in our house displaying gunas not

sattvic but quite different. Would we take a decision not to perform his

upanayanam considering his gunas that are patent at present? Supposing a

daughter is of a similar type. Will we look for a boy from a different caste at

the appropriate time of her marriage? Supposing there is a very sattvic barber

for whom we have great regard. Will we call him to officiate as one of the

(two) brahmanas during the shraaddham? Mixing up the gunas displayed by a

person and the varna-vyavastha will only lead to a lot of a-vyavastha. This is

what I had in mind, but did not say in so many words, when I wrote about the

non-recognition of the distinction between the varnas and the caste system.

 

In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, there is the Ajata-shatru Brahmanam (Chapter

2, Brahmanam 1). Therein, a brahmana by name Baalaaki professed to know the

Ultimate Truth, Brahman, and offered to teach that vidya to Ajatashatru, the

king, a kshatriya. Very soon Ajatashatru, who was a Jnani himself, came to know

that Balaaki did not in fact know the Truth. Thereupon, Baalaki begged of

Ajatashatru to teach him the Truth and offered to be the king's disciple.

However, Ajatashatru, who was in the know of the 'aachaaravidhi' that to be an

Acharya is the prerogative of a brahmana and as this would be against the

established aacharavidhi, precludes Baalaaki from being a disciple of his but

proceeds to teach him the Truth. Here the aachaaravidhi is pointed out by the

commentators: From the Uttamavarna the knowledge is to be grasped by the one of

the Adhama varna by prostrating and service. But when an occasion arises where

the vidya is to be gained from the Adhama by an Uttama,

shraddha etc. alone are to be had (not the namaskara, etc.). It is pertinent

to note how Ajatashatru, a jnani, chose to go by the aachaaravidhi and did not

discard it saying, 'in Advaita there are no differences'.

 

The Mahabharata is replete with verses indicating the presence of highly

laudable gunas in persons of a lower varna.

 

With warm regards,

subbu

 

 

 

 

 

Mail

Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

 

 

[Guest guest]

If birth is the criteria, Vishwamitra would not have become a saint, being a

Kshatriya by birth. So is Valmiki.

 

What about the present day Amritanandamai (Amma) who is born in a fishermen

family. But today she is one of the most revered and respected saint - even

high caste Brahmins fall to her feet for blessings.

 

I don't think birth alone is the criteria to decide the superiority.

 

Babu

 

 

V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v wrote:

 

 

Namaste Sri Ram ji:

First, pl. pardon me for the delay in responding. I was thinking of a

situation like this: Supposing there is a boy in our house displaying gunas not

sattvic but quite different. Would we take a decision not to perform his

upanayanam considering his gunas that are patent at present? Supposing a

daughter is of a similar type. Will we look for a boy from a different caste at

the appropriate time of her marriage? Supposing there is a very sattvic barber

for whom we have great regard. Will we call him to officiate as one of the

(two) brahmanas during the shraaddham? Mixing up the gunas displayed by a

person and the varna-vyavastha will only lead to a lot of a-vyavastha. This is

what I had in mind, but did not say in so many words, when I wrote about the

non-recognition of the distinction between the varnas and the caste system.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ramanath Babu <ramanath_babu

wrote:

>

> I don't think birth alone is the criteria to decide the superiority.

>

 

Namaste,

 

The word 'superiority' is the mischief-maker! Varna is for the

harmony of life. Gita 9:30-31-32 should dispel any doubts about Sri

Krishna's stand on the issue.

 

api chetsuduraachaaro bhajate maamananyabhaak.h .

saadhureva sa mantavyaH samyagvyavasito hi saH .. 9\-30..

kShipraM bhavati dharmaatmaa shashvachchhaanti.n nigachchhati .

kaunteya pratijaaniihi na me bhaktaH praNashyati .. 9\-31..

maa.n hi paartha vyapaashritya ye.api syuH paapayonayaH .

striyo vaishyaastathaa shuudraaste.api yaanti paraaM gatim.h .. 9\-32..

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Subbu:

 

I have already stated that certain characteristics of Varna System will

likely appear to resemble like caste system. From the examples that you

have provided, we can't infer that they are the same!

 

On the basis of my understanding of Gita of chapter 18, verses 42 to

48, it mostly emphasizes that Karmas are to be conducted as a 'Yagya,'

without conducting any analysis. Ideally, the Karma should be Satvik,

the Karana should be Satvik, and the Kartha should be Satvik. That

Karma that benefits everyone and harms none is Satvik. A Satvik Kartha

has to be unselfish (no desire for personal benefits). A Satvik Karana

will emerge when the Satvik Kartha attains Satvik knowledge. Such a

Karthik Kartha also requires a Satvik Buddhi (discrinating intellect to

distinguish between 'right (dharmic)' and 'wrong (adharmic)' Karma.

Finally the Satvik Kartha necessarily should have the Satvik Dhriti

with a single track mind to complete the Karma.

 

Varna Dharma only stresses the importance of conducting the ordined

duties with the Yagya spirit - being unselfish to conduct the job to

benefit of the entire society. Finally, Vedanta expects all of us not

to judge others (that includes our son) and just do what we believe

is 'right.'

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin, V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v

wrote:

> First, pl. pardon me for the delay in responding. I was thinking

of a situation like this: Supposing there is a boy in our house

displaying gunas not sattvic but quite different. Would we take a

decision not to perform his upanayanam considering his gunas that are

patent at present? Supposing a daughter is of a similar type. Will we

look for a boy from a different caste at the appropriate time of her

marriage? Supposing there is a very sattvic barber for whom we have

great regard. Will we call him to officiate as one of the (two)

brahmanas during the shraaddham? Mixing up the gunas displayed by a

person and the varna-vyavastha will only lead to a lot of a-vyavastha.

This is what I had in mind, but did not say in so many words, when I

wrote about the non-recognition of the distinction between the varnas

and the caste system.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Subbu-ji:

 

Please see my thoughts on your post below.

 

advaitin, V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v

wrote:

>

>

> Namaste Sri Ram ji:

> First, pl. pardon me for the delay in responding. I was

thinking of a situation like this: Supposing there is a boy in our

house displaying gunas not sattvic but quite different. Would we

take a decision not to perform his upanayanam considering his gunas

that are patent at present? Supposing a daughter is of a similar

type. Will we look for a boy from a different caste at the

appropriate time of her marriage? Supposing there is a very sattvic

barber for whom we have great regard. Will we call him to officiate

as one of the (two) brahmanas during the shraaddham? Mixing up the

gunas displayed by a person and the varna-vyavastha will only lead

to a lot of a-vyavastha. This is what I had in mind, but did not

say in so many words, when I wrote about the non-recognition of the

distinction between the varnas and the caste system.

>

>

 

Neelakantan:

 

If one follows one's dharma, it is the duty of the parent to perform

upanayana samskara for the boy. Again, it is the dharma of the

parent to perform the vivaha samskara for the daughter. All

questions relating to varna dharma can be resolved thus. Indeed, our

scriptures stress performance of one's dharma above all.

 

The deeper issue is whether one believes in karma. If karma decided

the birth of the child in a particular family and specific

circumstances, then one need not worry about what gunas are

exhibited by the child. One need not second guess Ishvara in this.

>

>

> In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, there is the Ajata-shatru

Brahmanam (Chapter 2, Brahmanam 1). Therein, a brahmana by name

Baalaaki professed to know the Ultimate Truth, Brahman, and offered

to teach that vidya to Ajatashatru, the king, a kshatriya. Very

soon Ajatashatru, who was a Jnani himself, came to know that Balaaki

did not in fact know the Truth. Thereupon, Baalaki begged of

Ajatashatru to teach him the Truth and offered to be the king's

disciple. However, Ajatashatru, who was in the know of

the 'aachaaravidhi' that to be an Acharya is the prerogative of a

brahmana and as this would be against the established aacharavidhi,

precludes Baalaaki from being a disciple of his but proceeds to

teach him the Truth. Here the aachaaravidhi is pointed out by the

commentators: From the Uttamavarna the knowledge is to be grasped by

the one of the Adhama varna by prostrating and service. But when an

occasion arises where the vidya is to be gained from the Adhama by

an Uttama,

> shraddha etc. alone are to be had (not the namaskara, etc.). It

is pertinent to note how Ajatashatru, a jnani, chose to go by the

aachaaravidhi and did not discard it saying, 'in Advaita there are

no differences'.

>

> The Mahabharata is replete with verses indicating the presence

of highly laudable gunas in persons of a lower varna.

>

> With warm regards,

> subbu

 

 

 

I think there are many instances in the Upanishads where brahmanas

are taught by kshatriyas. In the Gita too, Sri Krishna declares that

he first taught the yoga to Surya who in turn taught the same to

Manu and then it was passed on from generation to generation. (Ch 4,

Verses 1-2).

 

Hope this helps.

Harih Om.

Neelakantan