Did Adi Shankaracharya denounce Caste?

[Guest guest]

The position of shudras in varna vyavastha by birth is not degraded by the varna vyavastha system but the neo religious cults. Again depending on their lineage, different groups of shudras played different roles which were not at all mineal. They had great respect from brahmins, kshathriyas and vysyas. Almost all the 18 puranaas and 18 upapuranaas were narrated by Sutha. In every puranaa one would find "Sutha Uvacha". Sutha is a group under the chathurtha varna who directly learned all the puranaas from Veda vyasa and they were experts in delivering lectures on all the puranaas. Even the highly rituous Agnihotra Brahmanas provide them with asana to hear the nectar of puranaas from "Sutha". Roma pada, Roma Harshana and Ugrashravas are the name of few suthas who delivered lectures on puranaas. Further, in sanaathana Dharma, why only talk of caste barriers - even there are no religious barriers for salvation. Unlike in Christianity or Islam, in sanathana Dharma, no formal procedures are prescribed for embracing dharma. The moment a human being decides to follow the Vedic Religion, he can start following it without even getting any initiation. It is only for specifically adapting a branch of sanathana Dharma like Shaiva, Vaishnava, Shaktha, Saura, Gaanapathya does one require formal Deeksha. Further there are many instances that even without formal deeksha people from other religions realised lord krishna. sants like Latif and Rahim did not get proper initiation in vaishnava system but still got the darshan of Lord Krishna. What matters in Sanaathana Dharma in God Realisation is sincerety and dedication. Shouting about caste system - twisting varnashrama Dharma by birth so as to mean it cheap with caste system - these are politics and would continue for quite long. But the pure Varna system is with all for varnas by birth is still in vogue and properly practiced - albeit with less number of people - below vindyas. Above vindyas - there is total chaos. Whereas it is said in scriptures - "Vipratve surtramevahi" - one would find even this thing missing among vipras beyond vindyas.

[Guest guest]

 

The Gita is in perfect harmony with all Vedic literatures, and all Acharya's have accepted it as such, including Shankara (ekam shastram devaki putra-gitam).

 

So the Gita should be interpreted to be line with other scriptures. We cannot interpret the Gita however we choose to, disregarding other scriptures and actual perception.

 

The Gita is not a one shop stop for if it was complete in itself, no one would have bothered to write volumes of commentaries on the Sutras and the Upanishads. Just the Gita Bhashya would have been sufficient. But everyone knows that is not the case. Madhva for instance, wrote not one but four commentaries on the Sutras. Badarayana's school of vedanta is based not just on the Gita, but on the combined authority of the Sutras, Upanishads and the Gita.

 

To repeat, any interpretation of any of these texts which is not in sync with the other texts is considered incorrect.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

As an example, the Gita towards the end of chapter 9 talks about the knowers of the three vedas.

 

One can interpret this in isolation to claim that the Atharvana Veda is not a valid veda as the Gita refers to only 3 vedas. But this is not true as all systems of Vedanta & Mimamsa consider the 4 Vedas as authority. This is what I mean by talking care to interpret texts correctly.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

This one is already posted in other thread headed as "ill-treatment-brahmins"

My opinion here

--

 

I think most of all know that Bramhin is a practise with set of samskaras following some dogmos.

 

We all know that Sanskrit has Seven Thousand years of history with proofs.

In the early years of sanskrit; few practised Barmhanyam by putting threads around their shoulder and few are not. This doesnot make different from others as we all know, all came from the same old species (Monkey species).

 

As in these doctrines, the rules specify to become Yogi are u should not eat meat, should not go for non-voilence etc. Others contradict or decline these rules they got seperated from educated (bramhins) at that times. Bramhins of those times may be perfect and they treat all well. If you take Khatriyas(non-bramhins) eat meat to participate well in Wars that becomes dharma here sometimes.

 

As generations go learned became bramhins and others out of this Sanskrit dogmos. Early years bramhins may be perfect and they might be treating well with all. But still as generations go, bramhins started just believing them as rules than considering as concepts. And this resulted half-knowledged persons to condemn people who are non-bramhins from society. And slowly percentage of them raised.

 

This wrong treatment was followed many generations which came out nearly around 18th century.

 

MADI as specified in the post, in those days cleanliness was difficult. So they say MADI and collect water for cooking. This was misinterpreted in the later years.

 

I hope, WHAT HAPPENED IS QUIET NATURAL AND IS A HUMAN TENDENCY.

Generations and history of 7K it do happen. Interesting thing is Hinduism is only one religion retained for so many years. All other religions of those is no heard or followed now.

 

One thing is, Bramhins have to realize the truth and find god in all.

 

Its not the bramhins only have to change, soceity have to change.

In India if you see, religion has become political business now-a-days.

Where every Indian fall into that trap and get into sequels. Very bad.

 

Thanks for the time,

Mayur

[Guest guest]

I have read a speech by Osho that he's almost in sync with Adi shankara's teachings with the exception of Shankara's support of caste system. Infact, Osho says that tried taking some of the mutts headon on this matter.

 

I don't think Shankara should have denounced caste system to the future satisfaction of Osho. If one were to denounce and remove caste system, then we will just be replacing one type of caste system with another type. It's like the press which denounced caste system vehemently, trying to propagate a seperation between rich and poor, the famous & the ordinary, the nice & the not-so-nice, the politicians & people, etc..all these for the press's own commercial-oriented reasoning.

 

So let's not assume that denouncing means doing a right thing. There are always going to be victims of something or the other. Be it the shudras under the caste system or the jews from the world war.

 

Going upto the needy and helping them without a sense of doership is what's required. Shankara just appealed for that in all his teachings.

 

What to do, our press and the school-text-book writers will never learn to report facts without driving home their hidden perceptions of who the victim is and who the culprit is. Little does our reader know that the facts are already distorted.

 

I don't blame Osho. Maybe, Osho thought that Shankara was too big a person that he could have removed caste system, if he wanted. Maybe Shankara didn't know that he was that powerful. Maybe Shankara was content if Vedic teaching were better received by its own native people.

[Guest guest]

ISKCON has given a coined name to its sampradaya Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. Its like hot ice cream. Madhva and followers of his school believe in birth based Varnashrama Dharma. Even today the Madhwa Brahmins strongly believe in birth based Varnashrama Dharma. All the eight matas of Madhwa sampradaya in karnataka very strictly adhere to birth based varnashrama dharma. In gaudiya sampradaya, Radha finds a prime place. She is Goloka nayaki. The main consort of shri krishna. (leaving aside swakiya and parakiya controversies). But she has no place in Madwa sampradaya. Madhwa school says gopis are apsara sthris. Would followers of Brahma Madhwa Gaudiya sampradaya dare to downgrade Radha as just an apsara sthri and instead give the position to Rukmini devi as given by Madhwas.

[shvu]

I am curious.

 

Does anyone know of some examples inside the Brahma madhva Gaudiya samradaya where a non-Brahmana was converted into a Brahmana with a sacred thread and everything? If yes, what was the conversion procedure and what is the source of this procedure? What was the gotra of this new convert? I have seen an article on a Gaudiya website about how the Vaishnava is better than the Brahmana which leads me to believe, such a conversion procedure does not exist even inside the BMG tradition, but maybe I am wrong.

 

Note that Varna and Ashrama are different things. Varna is by birth and Ashrama is not.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

Whether or not Shankara approved caste system, many yogis don't, who have achieved enlightenment through the Vedic tradition. The caste system is NOT integral to the Vedic tradition. I don't believe any one view to be an authority above all others, but if one can believe in the Vedic tradition without believing in caste, then caste is not deemed integral.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

There is evidence that Ramanuja converted tribal people to brahmanas in melkote.

 

Regarding Gaudiya Vaishnavas, Prabhupada addressed them as achyuta gotra, coming in the line of Bhagavan. But whether prior Gaudiya's had done this I am not aware. The giving of gayatri diksha to all people is a somewhat recent addition to Gaudiya vaishnavism.

 

There were plenty of non Hindu's who took to Gaudiya vaishnavism in the past. The most famous was the muslim Haridas, but he did not receive gayatri diksha, and only chanted the names of Krishna 24 hours a day.

[Guest guest]

 

But how did Shankara defeat Buddhists who had opened the door to the shudras, only to have Shankara win over most of India and slam the door shut in the face of the shudras again? It would've been hard for a country with an open philosophy to become a restrictive philosophy after so long.

QUOTE]

 

 

Number 2, I agree with you 100% on this. This has been my concern since the start of this thread. People claim that Adi Shankara supported the caste system but I find this extremely hard to believe because he would have never won the hearts of Hindus back if he supported caste. Remember, the Brahmin elite consist of a very small percentage in the over all Hindu population and most other castes would never have wanted to go back to caste system since Buddha was highly critical of caste and preached equality for all. Shankara may have supported caste in his early life but I think this gradually changed through experience and God realization, thus he preached that all souls can attain liberation and realize God.

 

People might wonder that if my statement above contains any truth and if Shankara was a Hindu reformist then why do Hindus (in India) practice caste so rigidly today? My answer to this is that no matter how many Hindu Gurus, leaders, yogis, as well as enlightened ones of other religions such as Buddha, Mahavir, and Sikh Gurus preach against caste system, it will still be in India because the early Brahmins have left a system that is so rigid it is likely it will ever go away no matter what religion you are. It’s similar to the class system here- it is likely it will go away. This is why even Christians and Muslims practice caste in India. Hindus outside of India (Trinidad, Fiji, Africa, US, Europe, etc…) don't practice caste. I was born and raised in Fiji and caste was never an issue among Hindus there and there is MANY spiritual Hindus there.

 

We Hindus need to make a conscious effort to distinguish ourselves from Brahminism and we need to make a stronger effort to unite regardless of caste. It seems as if Hindus always get the bad end of the stick. There is a HUGE misconception among many people that Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs are known as the champion religions of India while Hindus are the so called "primitive and backward" religion that these other religions preached so much against. You will read articles among some Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Westerners that their religion is different from Hinduism based on the fact that they preach equality, they don't practice caste, give women equal status and don't worship idols. They are pretty much insinuating that Hindus believe in caste, don't give women equal status and are primitive because they worship idols. This shows clearly how ignorant people can be. Of course these religions are different from Hinduism but to differentiate on the basis that they are more humanitarian is ridiculous and shows that they have very little understanding (if any in some cases) of Hinduism. These people don't realize that caste, oppression of women have all stemmed from Brahminism and NOT Hinduism. This might answer some of their (Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists in India) own questions since they themselves can't understand why they still practice castiesm and oppression of women even through their religion preaches against it.

[Guest guest]

 

Hindus outside of India (Trinidad, Fiji, Africa, US, Europe, etc…) don't practice caste. I was born and raised in Fiji and caste was never an issue among Hindus there and there is MANY spiritual Hindus there.

 

Don't forget the Balinese Hindus.

Hindus in India have a lot to learn from Hindus outside of India, it seems..

[Guest guest]

 

We Hindus need to make a conscious effort to distinguish ourselves from Brahminism and we need to make a stronger effort to unite regardless of caste.

 

Exactly. The Brahmins who are bigots (and not all are, by any means) must be ignored and exposed as fake men of God - just like Jesus Christ did with the bigot Pharisees, who also falsely posed as men of God.

 

Let every Hindu with a heart stand up against the slightest bigotry, anproclaim love and compassion for all human beings, just like the avatar Buddha taught us to do, when he too exposed fake brahmins.

 

True spiritual men, see the atman in all beings, and look upon all with an equal eye.

[Guest guest]

belief in varna system by birth is not bigotry. belief in caste system without its roots in varna is bigotry. its just a belief and a foolish belief that brahmins established varna or caste system. this was established by god and practiced in india together by all the varnas. varna or case never stood in the way of god realisation or liberation. there are innumerable examples of great souls who belonged to chathurtha varna or panchamaa or even great souls who in spite of having born in semitic religions realised hindu gods. yes a vast majority of people in India are tending to become not caste oriented. But a very sizeable number of people are attached to caste for the purpose of enjoying the benefits of quota raj. As long as there is politics in India, my dear hindu friends in africa and pacific - be ensured that caste is here to stay although it is not good for the hindu community. People who believe in varna system by birth are miniscule minority who are not in the mainstream. They are docile and unattached to the society doing their rituals in their little world.

[Guest guest]

 

Although study of Vedas was restricted to Brahmanas, there existed other literature for non-Brahmanas such as Puranas and other stories to learn about these topics. That way, knowledge was never really restricted.

 

 

I've been doing a little thinking about this and here is my take. Shankara may have said that the Vedas are for Brahmins alone. When you take into account how huge the Vedas are and how difficult they are to understand you cound see why you need a special 'community' of people to study them. They are really ritualistic books that are not meant for most people. The problem with this is that fact that few Brahmins today actually study the Vedas, so many of them have actually "fell from caste". I think Shankara said things like "Brahm jnana is more important than the Vedas" and the Gita makes a similar criticism with the "flowery language of the Vedas" are useless for a man of self-realisation. So maybe he was saying the study of the Vedanta (Upanishads, Brahma-sutras and Gita) are for all Hindus of all castes and will lead to self-realisation of Atman-Brahman and therefore Moksha, so the Vedas need only be studied by the Brahmins who will do rituals for the other castes.

 

But the verse he quoted about pouring lead into the ears of a shudra is totally unacceptable from anyone who claims to be spiritual. How could he have been a rationalist, a self-realised soul and hold views like this? You can understand why it's a little hard to believe. If he really did say this, he is not as great as people make out. A Brahmin is supposed to believe in non-violence and non-injury and be without hatred, but if a Brahmin does these things, he cannot be a true brahmin and would have inflicted negative karma on himself!

 

Although I can understand why only certain dedicated communities of people such as Brahmins can study the Vedas, I still cannot understand their reason for inflicting violence on shudras if a shudra hears Vedic mantras. Why this hatred to just shudras and not the other 2 castes? Ksatriyas are supposed to protect the weak, so if a Brahmin goes to harm a shudra, isn't the ksatriya supposed to stop the Brahmin?

 

 

At some point for some mysterious reason, the Veda mantras became a closed canon and could not be edited or added to anymore. This closed canon became the legacy of the Brahmanas and has been guarded this way until now. If Shankara lived now and still stuck to those obsolete ideas, then he would rightfully be an idiot. But he lived in a different time when the varna system along with its rules and restrictions was to be religiously followed.

 

 

In the early days of the Vedic religion, the varna system was like a union system, where people joined and supported what they fitted in. People who were spiritual became Brahmins, those who were for the government and warriors became kshatriyas, those who were merchant/traders/businessmen became Vaishas and those who provided service to others were Shudras. Because these people mixed mainly with people of their own varna, they tend to think alike and they married within their social stature. This carried on for centuries until all that people knew well was their own varna. Naturally in those days a son will learn from his father's occupation and so inherit it. He would marry someone of a similar background and raise the kids the same way. This carried on for so long that it was difficult for a person of one varna to marry one of another varna and marry as the two families would be very different and may not get on. People thought you inherit everything from your parents, so then the hereditary caste system was born. Brahmins enjoyed the high status and respect they got and wanted to protect their position and didn't want those of other backgrounds 'muscling in' on their territory. So as they would never accept other castes as Brahmins they intented a set of rules such as the manu smriti which gave them (false) authority to haram others and use various scare tactics to keep other castes in check.

 

I've had a look at the kamakoti.org website that represent the shankaracharya tradition. What Adi Shankaracharya really thought of caste, we don't know, there's so many contradictory information, but these followers make it clear what they think. To put it short they believe in caste-by-birth and give excuses of why they think it's right - which I found quite amusing. The thing is I think they are rather short-sighted when looking at caste and don't see the bigger picture. They only seem concerned with India and it's Hindus, but if the one God created all humans of all races and nationlity, why should the hereditary caste system only apply to Hindus? Hindus are a small minority when we are talking about the world population. The kamakoti site talks about if a shudra is good, he may be reborn as a brahmin in his next life time. But what about people of the rest of the world (outside India) who have no caste and no caste system? Are westerners allowed to practice their religion and still attain Moksha? If Hinduism is a true religion and a westerner adopts and practices any of the 4 yogas as a path to God then he/she is much luckier than a shudra who has to sweat under the caste system and wait for his next life to be a Brahmin.

BUT, there is one place where they say that a person of one caste CAN on rare occassions change his caste in the same lifetime as an exception to the rule of jati-dhrama, but when you look at it, this contradicts everything they have said!

 

 

What is the origin of the Shudras? It may have probably started by color or occupation. Till the last couple of centuries, occupations and crafts continued in a family - the son would follow his dad's profession.

 

 

You can see how the Dalits have a strong case when you have casteist Hindu groups still in existence. But if there were no Shudras the entire Hindu society would collapse.

I think Hinduism will change form with these testing times as India becomes a modern developed nation. But I think religion will become less important to people as a community and will be more about personal spirituality of individuals. And of course the caste system is going to crumble.

[Guest guest]

 

But the verse he quoted about pouring lead into the ears of a shudra is totally unacceptable from anyone who claims to be spiritual.

 

Yeah, can you imagine Buddha, Mother Theresa, Ghandi, or someone else of their spiritual character, saying something like that?

 

 

I've had a look at the kamakoti.org website that represent the shankaracharya tradition. What Adi Shankaracharya really thought of caste, we don't know, there's so many contradictory information, but these followers make it clear what they think. To put it short they believe in caste-by-birth and give excuses of why they think it's right - which I found quite amusing.

 

they must believe Shakaracharya taught that. Of course most Advaitins do not seem to teach this now. How can you proclaim all is one, and then proclaim such bigotry and segregation? Seems totally contradictory to Advaita.

 

 

The thing is I think they are rather short-sighted when looking at caste and don't see the bigger picture. They only seem concerned with India and it's Hindus, but if the one God created all humans of all races and nationlity, why should the hereditary caste system only apply to Hindus?

 

Anyone who can only associate Sanatana Dharma with one race or one country, is indeed short-sighted and betrays the universal teachings which the vedic scriptures proclaim. How can a religion proclaim reincarnation, and that we are all the same eternal Souls underneath our present body type, and then think that only their spiritual teachings are important or of interest to one race? For all they know, they might take birth in another race next lifetime! Don't they know that reincarnation means that you could come back as any nationality and be born into any spiritual tradition?! Seems such people would want the dharma to spread, for other souls who will incarnate, and can spiritually benefit from the Yoga teachings.

Many people who were Indian Hindus in their past lives, are now europeans, africans, chinese, etc. in this lifetime.

Hindus are a small minority when we are talking about the world population. The kamakoti site talks about if a shudra is good, he may be reborn as a brahmin in his next life time.

There is a 1 and 6 chance that a returning soul will be reborn outside India. There is a better chance to be reborn in a Muslim or Christian family (the two largest religions), than in a Hindu family. I can't imagine how these supposed deep thinkers can't see the obvious.

There are no Indian souls, Hindu souls, European souls, Christian souls, Arab Souls, or Muslim Souls. Soul has no such label on it. Souls are not these temporary labels and identities. Therefore they are not bound by these identities when they reincarnate.

But what about people of the rest of the world (outside India) who have no caste and no caste system? Are westerners allowed to practice their religion and still attain Moksha?

there have been so many westerners in Canada, Europe and the US who have accepted a Guru and are practicing some eastern yoga tradition - they could only laugh at someone who still foolishly thinks yoga is just for India.

hahaha any fools who think this seriously need to open their eyes. This is the year 2006.

spirituality is NOT ABOUT RACE. Spirituality is about seeking the spiritual world. And whatever tradition helps someone do that, they will be attracted to. Since eastern traditions are very deep, they are very attractive to westerners who are turned off with the "turn or burn" teachings of orthodox Christianity. Therefore, so many are seeking out answers in vedic traditions. And they have every right to. NO ONE OWNS Yoga practices. NO ONE OWNS the exclusive rights to follow the teachings of the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, etc.. any fools who think they do, should be pitied.

Such small minded peole live in their own little shells, and are totally self-absorbed ignoramuses, without a clue that there is a huge world out there with many, many people geniunely interested in spiritual improvement. Not only indians believe in reincarnation and seek Moksha.

If Hinduism is a true religion and a westerner adopts and practices any of the 4 yogas as a path to God then he/she is much luckier than a shudra who has to sweat under the caste system and wait for his next life to be a Brahmin.

!

yeah - by their logic its the Hindus being born outside India and the western converts who must have the good karma. Because they are being born in circumstances where they dont have to be concerned about this crap.

no one outside India cares about what a few, small-minded Brahmins think. We are benefiting from the vedic teachings and seeking spiritual improvement, regardless of what they think or don't think. I guess they can keep taking rebirth in their little snob circles if they choose to. While the rest who are geniunely seeking Moksha, and not worried about socio-politics or holding a high caste in this temporary world, seek the Kingdom of God.

[narayanadasa]

 

 

catur-varnyam maya srstam

guna-karma-vibhagasah

tasya kartaram api mam

viddhy akartaram avyayam

 

"According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable."

 

Jai Sriman Narayana:

I am not questioning the translation or the understanding but have the following question.

 

Looking a little deeply into the above verse, Lord Krishna says that HE (not WE) is the creator of the system. When HE says HE creates it could mean HE (1)does it at the time of birth based on the soul's past life by giving birth in a specific family (2)leaves it to the Aacharya's to decide or (3) leaves it for each individual person and his community to decide.

 

"WE" here could mean that all sorts of mundane people will decide who belongs to what caste... this will result is chaos as we see today because too many people will want to decide!

 

Please let me know this is incorrect.

[narayanadasa]

Jai Sriman Narayana:

 

I heard that even during Ramayana, once there was famine and Rama inspite of all efforts, yagnas etc could'nt solve the problem. He approached some Rishi who said that the famine was due to someone not following dharma. On enquiry the rishi with his divya-drishti came to know that a specific sudra at some place was chanting the vedas incorrectly. Rama went to that Sudra and asked him why he was doing that. The Sudra's answer was that he wanted moksha. Rama told him he can get moksha even without chanting the vedas.. he can just do his job (his duty, his dharma) with devotion. The sudra disagreed and then Rama cut-off the Sudra's head. The famine was gone.

 

However, I dont remember where I read this so I cannot draw any conclusions right now. But, if at all it is true, then it could mean that this varna based system was there even during Rama's time.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

If we look at it literally, Krishna says "By me the four castes (varnas) are created which are divided according to qualities (guna) and actions (karma)". I think if we take the direct meaning it is clear. Over thousands of years things always degrade and become corrupted (sa evayam maya te 'dya yoga proktah puratana sa kaleneha mahata yogo nashta parantapa). Even the science of linking with God (yoga) was "destroyed" due to "the passage of time".

[shvu]

 

What Adi Shankaracharya really thought of caste, we don't know, there's so many contradictory information, but these followers make it clear what they think. To put it short they believe in caste-by-birth and give excuses of why they think it's right - which I found quite amusing....

 

Shankara's position is very clear -- Varna is based on birth, period.

 

If someone has been spreading the idea that Shankara was a social reformer who disregarded the varna system, then that person is incorrect. Shankara was not a social reformer and such ideas of abolishing the system were not in vogue during his time. Like I said before, such ideas originated during the British rule for by then the caste system had taken on political overtones.

 

If anyone disagrees with this, please produce evidence of Shankara attempting to abolish the varna system. The opening verses in his celebrated Upadesha Sahasri make his position clear - the Guru should first enquire about the lineage of a prospective student as in the Chandogya Upanishad. That is the first criteria. This along with his BSB on Sutra 1.3.38 closes the case.

 

Cheers

[vrajavasi]

Radhe Krishna,

 

When we take a position and expect saints to fit into that this type of discussions take place. Shankaracharya preached monism - Advaita. Any and everybody who is in his precepts are not per se attained souls as such. They are just in his footsteps and on the path of kewala gnana.

 

Regarding Varnashrama Dharma, atleast as per scriptures varna can only be by birth. Every neo cult profess that varna is by guna and karma. In that case a person would be changing his guna and karma every hour - may be every minute. Then does it mean that his varna changes in that frequency. he would be chameleon then. By being born in any of the four varnas is not a privilege for anyone. But doing karmas as per the varna. Here again there are so many misinterpretations in the neo cult by degrading the shudras or the chthurthas. In the Varnashrama Dharma propogated for years and given fresh life at the time of shankaracharya, shudra had a respectable position like other varnas. As said by one of the guests, the suta pauranikas belong to the chathurtha varna.

 

Then neo cults engage themselves in brahmin conversion pogroms. Many asked what would be the gothra. shri jndas replied that they belonged to achyuta gothra. But hardly the matter ends here. Birth does not at all settle the gothra but also the suthra. What would be the suthra of the converted soul. To be a brahmin does not just mean that he performs bhakthi or engage himself in atma vichara or brahma gnana. All these things are to be performed by almost every human being irrespective of his varna and since ages people were engaging in all these activities irrespective of their varna.

 

What differentiates brahmins from others is their steadfast performance of nithya naimithika karmas which are ordained by god and which are to be performed according to one's suthra which is inherited by birth. A suthra is not selected according to guna and karma.

 

Radhe Krishna

[Guest guest]

how did Shakaracharya convert buddhists back to Hinduism, who had left hinduism because of the caste issue? if he did not shed new light on what had caused them to leave?

[Guest guest]

will all Gurus accept genuine dalit/shudra seekers, that are seeking moksha?

[Guest guest]

 

The Sudra's answer was that he wanted moksha. Rama told him he can get moksha even without chanting the vedas.. he can just do his job (his duty, his dharma) with devotion. The sudra disagreed and then Rama cut-off the Sudra's head.

 

...if at all it is true, then it could mean that this varna based system was there even during Rama's time.

 

Well maybe Rama gave him Moksha by cutting off his head. Remember all those killed by Rama were given instant Moksha! Rama must've thought he was doing him a favour.

 

But Brahmins to this day need to come up with an adequate enough answer as to why they are allowed to inflict harm on lower castes, because so far all their excuses have been pathetic to say the least. They are fooling nobody but themselves. Why is it so bad for a shudra to even hear vedic mantras, when today anybody in the world can buy Vedic mantras on CD or listen to them on the internet? Also today brahmins shouldn't claim authority of the Vedas, because most of them don't even study them, let alone understand them.

 

But the caste-by-birth vs. caste-by-action has always been a point of discussion. The fact that it was discussed in ancent texts shows that it needed to be re-clarrified a number of times. It is discussed by Yudhisthira, Krishna and Bhishma in different places in the Mahabharata. From what I've heard they all d to the view that caste was determined by action, duties, gunas and karma and not the family in which you are born into. But sage Veda Vyasa himself is the son of a sage and low caste fisherwoman. Yet he is accepted as a Brahmin? He was allowed to study the Vedas, even though he was born of a fisherwoman.

 

The varna by birth could mean being born into a varna due to karma, not the family you a reborn into. If this was practiced in the early vedic age, there's no reason why it can't be reformed now. The original idea of the varna system is indeed a good one as all societies consists roughly of four types of people (the majority corresponding of Vaishas) and it allowed mobility. But when caste became rigid and hereditary only, thats when the problems started.

 

My argument is why is it two brothers come from the same parents but are different in many ways. Let's say it's a Brahmin family, brother 1 is spiritual, while the other brother (2) likes chasing skirt. The spiritual brother 1 is well behaved and is attracted to the religion, while the other brother (2) is an Atheist and thinks religion is for losers, enjoys pre-marital sex with many women and likes to be drunk. But his parents see him as a Brahmin and when this boy grows up he is avaiable as the local pujari. Now why should this brother be seen as a brahmin? Going by the rationale of the pro-casteists he is a Brahmin as he was born into a family of brahmins. But which brother would you choose to conduct religious rituals? Now suppose brother no 1 didn't exist and only the immoral brother 2 existed. Just because he is a brahmin, you have to accept him to conduct rituals because the caste system says so. This is one of the biggest failings of the caste system, that it pushes some people into professions that they are not suitable for or should be trusted with. That it gives undeserved respect to brother 2, which he doesn't work for. The fact that there still are pro-casteists that still trying to enforce this twisted caste system on the rest of society, these people should not complain when Christians, Muslims and Buddhists are converting their people. In India you will get more respect from society and maybe even the higher castes if you belonged to one of these religions than being a shudra or untouchable. Since the Brahims have contributed to this problem, they shouldn't complain when Dalits convert or become Marxists.

 

Do not say this example is far-fetched because it is not, I know of similar Brahmin families like this and yet they still want to be respected as Brahmins by others, though they don't deserve it.

[Guest guest]

 

But Brahmins to this day need to come up with an adequate enough answer as to why they are allowed to inflict harm on lower castes, because so far all their excuses have been pathetic to say the least. They are fooling nobody but themselves.

 

such brahmins are their own worst enemy and they are the ones who will be reborn in lower castes/forms for their bad deeds. These brahmins have foolishly caused many members of low castes to convert to other religions; and caused the great religion of Hinduism to be spoken badly of. We must all denounce the practices of such brahmins, who practice any form of discrimination.

[Guest guest]

It's up for the good brahmins to lead by example, and show love and respect for all. Then the fake brahmins will be shamed, by the true brahmins who display true godly behaviour. The best thing that can happen is for the true brahmins to stand up against the fake brahmins.