Caste System by Birth?

[tackleberry]

According to BG 4.13, the Lord has created the four-fold order, presently known as the caste system. Whether we call it varnAshrama dharma or caste, the labels are immaterial at the moment. Question is: Is it birth-based? Let's see.

 

#1 The words again...cAtur-varNyam mayA sRSTam....these words suggest that the Lord created the caste system. No argument here.

 

#2 guNa-karma-vibhAgashaH - According to guna and karma, this system has been created. Which means, Krishna makes sure people take birth in the respective castes based on their previous karma etc. If one argues that a person can choose his caste, it's tantamount to faulting the Lord Himself! It's like saying, "Krishna has made a wrong decision by giving me a birth in the kshatriya caste, so I choose to be brAhmaNa." Are we to choose our caste, or will Krishna choose for us? Who is the Lord?

 

#3 If caste system is by choice, as modern scholars would have us believe, how are we to choose? What's the basis? And we could be wrong! But accepting caste by birth ends this problem, because the Lord cannot make mistakes.

 

#4 Krishna spoke to Arjuna, who was born in a royal family. He was a kshatriya by default. In fact, most people from all yuga-s were 'born' into castes. They didn't choose their caste. Exceptions like Valmiki are just that, exceptions, and they don't prove the rule.

 

#5 When Krishna says a brAhmaNa has to be kind, generous, tolerant, must perform yajnA-s, he's describing the gunas that a person born into a brAhmaNa caste has to cultivate, and the karma-s he has to perform, karma-s such as yajna, tapas etc.. It doesn't mean anyone who has these guna-s is a brAhmaNa. OTOH, a brAhmaNa must try to have these guna-s. That's all there's to it.

 

Conclusion:

All the above shows that caste system is by birth. I see nothing discriminatory about this. The Lord knows best, and based on our karma and guna, he gives us a birth in a certain caste. All we have to do is perform our duties pertaining to that caste in the spirit of bhakti. This makes one a vaishnava, regardless of caste. At the end of the day, that's what matters, bhakti to Krishna.

 

So why would people break their heads to prove that caste system is by choice, when it most certainly isn't! And I repeat, there's nothing shameful about birth-based caste, because it isn't man-made, it's created by the Lord Himself, who's infallible, achyuta. Yet, I see people arguing in favor of caste by choice, whatever that means. Without some rigidity, can there be any system in place? And if choice were to determine caste, then millions of people can make different decisions, almost on a daily basis. This would imply a frequently changing system, which is no system at all!

[raghu]

More specifically, birth is a prerequisite for one's varna. If one is born into a particular varna then it is his responsibility to take up the duties of that varna.

[Kulapavana]

because we are born into a particular body, a sudra can not be turned into a brahmana. However, sometimes - in very rare cases - a brahmana-natured person may be born in a non-brahmin family, or there may be other exceptions to the general tendency.

[matarisvan]

 

because we are born into a particular body, a sudra can not be turned into a brahmana. However, sometimes - in very rare cases - a brahmana-natured person may be born in a non-brahmin family, or there may be other exceptions to the general tendency.

 

The Varna is more relevant to the duties one takes up than with the nature.

 

About the duties to be taken up there is a lot of clarity in the Gita. The important point is a soul is born into the varna that is most appropriate for it. The varna in the next life will depend on the activities and goals during the present life. With this in mind whatever maybe the present varna, the person should worship Vishnu with full devotion through his or her life.

[Kulapavana]

 

The Varna is more relevant to the duties one takes up than with the nature.

 

 

Because of our material nature (the particular mix of 3 gunas) we adopt a particular profession (social duties) or varna. When sudras by nature try to take the social role of brahmanas, like explaining shastras to others, there is only disturbance.

 

The duties we adopt should match our nature.

[matarisvan]

 

Because of our material nature (the particular mix of 3 gunas) we adopt a particular profession (social duties) or varna. When sudras by nature try to take the social role of brahmanas, like explaining shastras to others, there is only disturbance.

 

The duties we adopt should match our nature.

 

The problem is we are not competent enough to determine our nature.

 

Prabhupada thought he was capable of doing this and commited a big blunder by awarding Brahmin status to incompetent people. In absence of such ability we should simply stick to the duties prescribed for our varna and try to follow them to the best of our ability.

 

But in the practical world, this is easier said than done. We may end up with a completely different set of duties due to circumstances, but we should still worship Vishnu with full devotion.

[Kulapavana]

 

The problem is we are not competent enough to determine our nature.

 

Prabhupada thought he was capable of doing this and commited a big blunder by awarding Brahmin status to incompetent people. In absence of such ability we should simply stick to the duties prescribed for our varna and try to follow them to the best of our ability.

 

But in the practical world, this is easier said than done. We may end up with a completely different set of duties due to circumstances, but we should still worship Vishnu with full devotion.

 

Sometimes in the middle of a battle, you make commanders out of ordinary soldiers, because that is all you have. Srila Prabhupada had a tremendous faith in the purifying nature of the process of Krsna consciousness and he was hoping that these unqualified people somehow be helped by Krsna in the execution of their service.

 

And you are right, sometimes we may end up with a completely different set of duties than our nature due to circumstances, but we should still worship Vishnu with full devotion. This present day world is very complicated.

[raghu]

I have been told on numerous occasions that iskcon's system of giving brahminical initiation to non-brahmins has its basis in paNCarAtra. Does anyone know which paNCarAtra supposedly authorizes this practice?

 

From what I have read in hari-bhakti vilas, birth is considered by gaudiyas to be a prerequisite. That would seem to make iskcon's system unorthodox by gaudiya standards.

[Kulapavana]

 

I have been told on numerous occasions that iskcon's system of giving brahminical initiation to non-brahmins has its basis in paNCarAtra. Does anyone know which paNCarAtra supposedly authorizes this practice?

 

 

First of all, the term "brahminical initiation" is a misnomer. It is actually diksa (upanayana), and in the Vedic system all three higher varnas are eligible for it.

 

Gaudiyas were giving diksa irrespective of caste for a very long time, since the times of Mahaprabhu. But the function of an initiating guru was generally reserved only for the brahmana Vaishnavas. That might have been more a matter of sensitivity to social convention than scriptural understanding.

[indulekhadasi]

Techinically by birth I am a brahmana. But I act like a sudra. So how can I be called a brahmana? It just doesn't make any sense.

[RadheRade1657]

What about people falling outside of the varna system? LOL, I guess I'd be far below a shudra if you're a shudra, Indulekha Ji!

[indulekhadasi]

 

What about people falling outside of the varna system? LOL, I guess I'd be far below a shudra if you're a shudra, Indulekha Ji!

 

Generally people born in outcaste families are totally uncultured and are therefore outcaste. But there are exceptions everywhere. That outcaste can elevate himself to the position of a brahmana by acting in sattva guna. Therefore this theory about birth is not the best because in history there have been many exceptions.

[raghu]

 

Techinically by birth I am a brahmana. But I act like a sudra. So how can I be called a brahmana? It just doesn't make any sense.

 

For you to be called a brahman would not make sense. Equally senseless is for you to state that you are of brahminical birth and then be complacent with acting like a shudra. If you are of brahminical birth then you should take up the duty of a brahmana, instead of saying you are more like a shudra just to avoid your brahminical duties.

[raghu]

 

First of all, the term "brahminical initiation" is a misnomer. It is actually diksa (upanayana), and in the Vedic system all three higher varnas are eligible for it.

 

Gaudiyas were giving diksa irrespective of caste for a very long time, since the times of Mahaprabhu. But the function of an initiating guru was generally reserved only for the brahmana Vaishnavas. That might have been more a matter of sensitivity to social convention than scriptural understanding.

 

I was specifically referring to brahminical initiation. Obviously some individuals in iskcon act like brahmanas - they perform the archana, give lectures, and then serve as initiating gurus despite not belonging to a brahminical family by birth. What is the paNcharAtric basis of this, if any? This is what I wanted to know.

[indulekhadasi]

 

For you to be called a brahman would not make sense. Equally senseless is for you to state that you are of brahminical birth and then be complacent with acting like a shudra. If you are of brahminical birth then you should take up the duty of a brahmana, instead of saying you are more like a shudra just to avoid your brahminical duties.

 

Being a brahmana is not so easy.

I can do my duties, fine. But if my mentality is that of a sudra, then I am a sudra no matter what my occupation is.

[raghu]

 

Being a brahmana is not so easy.

 

No it isn't. These days, to be a brahmana means to be scorned by all and sundry (iskconites included) who would blame all of India's problems on brahmins. A brahmana can never expect to be respected for who he is or what he does, especially in this day and age. Being a brahmana is far more difficult than you can possibly conceive of.

 

 

I can do my duties, fine. But if my mentality is that of a sudra, then I am a sudra no matter what my occupation is.

 

Who determines objectively what your mentality is? Frankly, that just sounds like a cop-out to avoid your God-given duties.

[indulekhadasi]

 

 

Who determines objectively what your mentality is? Frankly, that just sounds like a cop-out to avoid your God-given duties.

 

Look, despite my mentality I am not giving up my duties. You seriously need to stop jumping to conclusions.

At the same time, even while doing my duties I have a fault finding mentality then how can I be called a brahmana? Does that make any sense?

[raghu]

 

Look, despite my mentality I am not giving up my duties. You seriously need to stop jumping to conclusions.

At the same time, even while doing my duties I have a fault finding mentality then how can I be called a brahmana? Does that make any sense?

 

Arjuna did not cease to be a kShatriya because he was ready to beg instead of fight on the battlefield. Did you read anywhere in the gItA that Arjuna by the very act of renunciation became a brAhmana?

 

AshvathAma committed the most atrocious act of murdering the sleeping sons of the pAndavas. However, he did not cease to be a brAhamana by the very fact. If you have read the bhAgavatam you will see there Arjuna faced a dilemma of whether or not to kill him because ashvathAma was the son of a brAhmana (Drona) and thus also a brAhmana. That was in spite of the fact that ashvathAma was a murderer.

 

You are defining varna in very abstract terms but the reality was that people were known by the varna of their birth in Vedic civilization. The above examples clearly prove this. On the other hand, your theory that one can change his varna by the basis of his "mentality" are clearly contradicted by the above.

[indulekhadasi]

 

Arjuna did not cease to be a kShatriya because he was ready to beg instead of fight on the battlefield. Did you read anywhere in the gItA that Arjuna by the very act of renunciation became a brAhmana?

 

AshvathAma committed the most atrocious act of murdering the sleeping sons of the pAndavas. However, he did not cease to be a brAhamana by the very fact. If you have read the bhAgavatam you will see there Arjuna faced a dilemma of whether or not to kill him because ashvathAma was the son of a brAhmana (Drona) and thus also a brAhmana. That was in spite of the fact that ashvathAma was a murderer.

 

You are defining varna in very abstract terms but the reality was that people were known by the varna of their birth in Vedic civilization. The above examples clearly prove this. On the other hand, your theory that one can change his varna by the basis of his "mentality" are clearly contradicted by the above.

 

If you properly understood the pastime, Ashwathama was killed and not killed. He was not killed because by birth he was a brahmana, but he was able to be "killed" in other ways because in all other respects he was NOT a brahmana.

[shvu]

 

If you properly understood the pastime, Ashwathama was killed and not killed. He was not killed because by birth he was a brahmana, but he was able to be "killed" in other ways because in all other respects he was NOT a brahmana.

 

Do you believe that your real varna is Shudra to the point that you gave up your Brahmana duties and have taken up Shudra activities?

 

If not, why?

 

Cheers

[indulekhadasi]

 

Do you believe that your real varna is Shudra to the point that you gave up your Brahmana duties and have taken up Shudra activities?

 

If not, why?

 

Cheers

 

I may do brahmana like things like chanting and reading sastra but at the same time I have a fault finding mentality. And that means I *do the action* of faultfinding. Which is an act of sudras.

Brahmanas can not be two-sided. They are very pure and are respected by the Supreme Lord Himself.

[raghu]

 

If you properly understood the pastime, Ashwathama was killed and not killed. He was not killed because by birth he was a brahmana, but he was able to be "killed" in other ways because in all other respects he was NOT a brahmana.

 

You are missing the point (again). The point is that it was a dilemma in the first place only because of the fact that ashvathAma was a brahmin.

 

 

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam

1.7.43

 

 

 

 

 

u

vāca

cāsahanty

asya

 

bandhanānayanaḿ

satī

 

mucyatāḿ

mucyatām

eṣa

 

brāhmaṇo

nitarāḿ

guruḥ

 

 

She could not tolerate

Aśvatthāmā

's being bound by ropes, and being a devoted lady, she said: Release him, for he is a

brāhmaṇa

, our spiritual master.

 

 

 

 

 

This clearly shows that ashvatthAma was still referred to as a brahmin despite his heinous act. He did not get demoted to a shudra or less because of his sinful behavior.

 

Also let me again reiterate the other examples which you conveniently ignored:

 

1) Drona: He was a brahmin but took to the life of a kshatriya due to his warlike disposition. Was he then referred to thereafter as a kshatriya? No. Anyone who has read the mahAbhArata can tell you that the text continued to refer to him as a brAhmana.

 

2) Arjuna: He demonstrated a propensity towards renunciation when he declined to fight on the battlefield of Kurukshetra. He was ready to renounce everything and just live by begging. Did Lord Krishna accept it? No. He argued that Arjuna was a kshatriya and should fight the battle despite his brahminical disposition.

 

These examples refute your point of view that one's varna changes on the basis of his "mentality."

 

Finally, let us quote other shAstric pramAnas that further refute your point of view:

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is

18.47

 

 

śreyān

sva

-dharmo

viguṇaḥ

 

para

-

dharmāt

sv

-

anuṣṭhitāt

 

svabhāva

-

niyataḿ

karma

 

kurvan

nāpnoti

kilbiṣam

 

 

It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are never affected by sinful reactions.

 

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is

18.59

 

 

yad

ahańkāram

āśritya

 

na

yotsya

iti

manyase

 

mithyaiṣa vyavasāyas

te

 

prakṛtis

tvāḿ

niyokṣyati

 

 

If you do not act according to My direction and do not fight, then you will be falsely directed. By your nature, you will have to be engaged in warfare.

 

 

 

 

 

Why did Lord Krishna say it was Arjuna's nature to fight? And that too despite Arjuna offering to give up everything and take to begging? Because Arjuna was born a kshatriya and he was obligated to follow kshatriya dharma. Arjuna did not get promoted to brahmin status because of his compassion for his family.

 

It is strange to me that on one hand, you claim that you have the mentality of a shudra and should thus be considered a shudra. Yet on the other hand you presume to argue on spiritual topics and instruct others on proper understanding of scripture/philosophy. This is not the activity of a shudra. So, which is it? Are you a shudra or not? Are you performing shudra dharma or not?

[raghu]

 

I may do brahmana like things like chanting and reading sastra but at the same time I have a fault finding mentality. And that means I *do the action* of faultfinding. Which is an act of sudras.

Brahmanas can not be two-sided. They are very pure and are respected by the Supreme Lord Himself.

 

Either you are a brahmin or a shudra. If you are a brahmin you should perform a brahmin's dharma. If you are a shudra you should perform the dharma of shudras, not the dharma of brahmins.

 

You are disobeying Lord Krishna who stated:

 

 

śreyān

sva

-dharmo

viguṇaḥ

 

para

-

dharmāt

sv

-

anuṣṭhitāt

 

svabhāva

-

niyataḿ

karma

 

kurvan

nāpnoti

kilbiṣam

 

 

It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are never affected by sinful reactions.

 

So if you say you are a shudra due to having a shudra's mentality, then by your own logic you are performing dharmas that are not prescribed for you.

[indulekhadasi]

I noticed you missed my point also. You totally ignored it.

Congratulations for fighting with someone who is 14 yrs old.

Perhaps you should find some intellectuals to fight with? Now that you tell me, shouldn't I be doing something brahminical instead of fighting with great personalities like youself?

[indulekhadasi]

 

So if you say you are a shudra due to having a shudra's mentality, then by your own logic you are performing dharmas that are not prescribed for you.

What I am trying to do is elevate my position to the position of that of a Vaishnava. That will be best. To be a Vaishnava there is no caste prerequesite. I think I should go for that.