Dr. P. Dayanandan, in his own words:
I retired as a professor and chairman of botany after teaching for 38 years. I have a Ph.D. from University of Michigan. I also post doctored for NASA. I have carried out many funded scientific projects and 10 Ph.D. scholars have studied with me. My interests range from all aspects of botany to Pallava art history, Tamil literature, Dalit issues, education, space biology and spending time with young people to explore social consequences of oppression and empowering them to pursue studies in India and abroad.
Ten years ago I helped organize a student and youth group called ‘THUDI’ involved in educating, agitating and organizing.
Adi Dravidar, Paraiyar (including Sambavar), Pallar, Arunthathiyar and Chakilyar constitute about 90% of the Dalits by number. They therefore dominate any discourse. In terms of numbers any Dalit Writing by these groups can be seen as representative of almost all Dalits. But that is dangerously deceptive. In terms of number of communities they represent only 7% of the Dalit people of Tamil Nadu. A mere 5 communities cannot adequately express the lived experience or literature of 71 other communities. If we have the will, I am sure we’ll have the resources to ‘totally liberate’ and change the lives of many of these small communities overnight, in consultation with them, and as they wish!
This is the Dilemma of being a Dalit! This dilemma of each dominant Dalit community seeking its identity, a glorious past and present preoccupation with itself is a characteristic of their oppressed position. Oppression gives multiple identities, none satisfactory to their self dignity and all very pleasing to the patronizing upper castes. Others may find a hundred terms that they think fit me, but try as hard I can, I will never find a satisfactory term to describe myself. Is there a way out of this quagmire?
Dalits must embrace a Metanarrative
I feel that Dalits should be leaders in telling their children and the world a grand story that can make all people transcend the desire to tell petty stories. Such a metanarrative is now available! Evolution, that grand unification of all life is certainly one of the greatest stories ever told by science. Modern evolutionary biologists and paleoanthropologists are now providing us with a larger, inspiring story of human origins, migrations and colonization that should be told to all people for a better comprehension of our place in nature.
The essentials of this story are:
The original home of all of us is Africa. The 7 billion people who are now living, and an estimated 108 billion people who have died within the past 50,000 years, all originated in Africa. It appears that all humans may in fact be the children of one lucky woman – the African or Mitochondria Eve. A small group of our ancestors left the African continent some 70 or 80 thousand years ago. The genetic diversity now found in all non-African countries is a legacy of this early group of Homo sapiens who left Africa. After 2,000 generations the descendants have multiplied to more than 5 billion people now living in non-African countries alone. Human beings, all 7 billion now living and the billions more that will be added, are remarkably like each other with 99.9% genetic similarity. A mere 0.1% difference is responsible for the diversity we observe. We are not a highly variable species. All the skin color variations of humans appeared only during the last 60,000 years. Africa is genetically the most diverse continent in the world, which is a reflection of nearly 200,000 years of accumulation of mutations. While no other continent can match this diversity, India appears to be the second richest country in genetic diversity. India was a major route of migration for people moving out of Africa into Asia and Australia, and was colonized when the first wave of migration occurred. There had been many subsequent waves of migration into and out of India, resulting in exogamy and intermixture. A typical Indian has been described as a ‘migrant par excellence’! The diversity of India became the basis for a process of stratification of the society that is responsible for the existence of 4,693 major communities and more than 50,000 small endogamous groups, including more than 1000 Dalit communities.
We will continue to explore the past historical events and ideological forces that segregated and oppressed people. We must continue to write both for creating literature and for expressing solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized and promoting activism. At the same time we need to take advantage of this metanarrative which has the potential to counter religious and other ideologies that thrive on dogma and prejudice and divide people. Science offers a story that encompasses all people across the world, and a story that can exclude ideologies and wishful statements. Scientists are unraveling the details of this human saga, everyday. Like many millions of Indians, I carry a mitochondrial mutation which first occurred in my maternal ancestor 50,000 years ago when she had just left Africa and was traveling in the Middle East. I tested my Y-chromosome and found that I carry a mutation that first occurred 30,000 years ago somewhere in the Middle East. Recently I connected with a person in Pakistan who tested and found that he carries the same mutation. My family is everywhere, and my ancestral roots are in Africa. There is nothing in this world that makes me a Dalit except the sick and prejudiced mindsets of some people who prefer to be less than human. Poet Inquilab would happily sing: Manushangada Naanga Manushangada!
Why the Dalits and Sudras who make up 80% of Hindus do not reject Hinduism and its dehumanizing caste system is a mystery to me. Any other people would have gone on a bloody rampage against the Brahmins ages ago.
The Hindu epic Ramayana was written by a robber or outcaste, Valmiki. The other hindu epic Mahabharata was written by the son of a fisher woman, Vyasa. The greatest indian rulers from the Mauryas to Shivaji were sudras. The least corrupt and most productive Indian politician since independence is Modi of Gujarat, also a Sudra. So much for the casteist presumption that vocational talent and character are inherited traits.
Hereditary casteism was never a rational or moral system. In the modern age it is even less so. Yet even the educated Hindus living in the West continue to cling to their caste.
+1 on the role of the lower orders in building Indian civilisation.
If the Hindu epics were written by lower castes, then doesn’t that deconstruct caste as so oppressive? We would appear to have our own problem in Pakistan, even though not Hindu–it is interesting there hasn’t been a census for so long:
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/abandoned-aborted-or-left-for-dead-these-are-the-vanishing-girls-of-pakistan/258648/
Thanks for posting this. I’m reminded of Ambedkar on caste where he said Indian Muslims have many of the same problems as their Hindu brethren but often amplified because they can’t or won’t accept it.
After all the big thing of how Islam reformed Jahilliya was that the Arabs would bury alive their daughters. I must confess as I was reading this article I thought a bit of Spengler and how Islamic societies are buckling in the face of modernity by reverting to paganistic norms.
Of course this is a socio-cultural phenomenon it may be fun and modern to stage the Vagina Monologues in Lahore but outside of their rarefied elite it sucks to be a woman generally in Pakistan.
I’m surprised the religious leaders have not weighed in on this issue. Generally I think of myself in the Clinton fold; abortion should be safe, legal and rare. I find it a bit disconcerting when it’s used for gender and social reengineering.
@Sahar
Not really, because the contributions of the lower castes be it the epics or even the main gods (Shiva,Lingam, Amman/Mother goddess) all just got co-opted and taken over the Brahmins.
The brahmins also co-opted beliefs and practices from the buddhists and jains, that are found nowhere in the Vedas.
@ Zachary,
Yes, I would like to know what the true facts are on this — I have an older brother and I never heard about this as a kid in Pakistan–but if Pakistanis (probably Punjabis) are doing the same thing in terms of aborting girls as we know goes on in Indian Punjab, well, that is just terrible and we need to address it. It is really quite sick, if true. How do they think that is a sustainable culture? agghhh.
-1 for the positive reference to the genocidal maniac Modi.
Looks like a disgusting case of whitewashing Modi’s crimes against humanity with the, “he may kill Muslims and be a bast***, but he’s my bas****” kind of internal rationalization.
Modi is a sectarian jerk, but calling him a proponent of genocide is debasing the term, very badly. You need some perspective. Otherwise you are missing what is truly horrific about genocide, by confusing it with “standard” South Asian violence, of which all groups are guilty, but not genocidaires.
A cursory glance at a UN General Assembly resolution on genocide indicates that what Modi is widely understood to have done (though collecting evidence has been problematic), fits their definition of genocide. I might be wrong though.
“Otherwise you are missing what is truly horrific about genocide, by confusing it with “standard” South Asian violence, of which all groups are guilty, but not genocidaires. ”
I’d beg to differ here. This is not really “standard” even in terms of South Asian violence.
I missed that entirely actually so good spot.
It was a communal riot not genocide. Hindus got killed as well, mostly by the police:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence
The Delhi communal riot against Sikhs was much worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_anti-Sikh_riots
And the communal riots during Partition were far, far worse, especially between Muslims and Sikhs in the Punjab.
@Bliss
It comes down to indoctrination. Very difficult to divorce people from religious brainwashing especially when conditions are extremely dire, like in India.
I’m sure all have heard the phrase about not being an atheist in a foxhole; well consider the impoverishment in India, religion (praying to Hindu gods) provides some comfort and hope for the masses. I’d liken it to needing morphine when you are in serious pain.
Yes Indians are very religious surprisingly so. It’s incredible that initially I always thoughts of Indians as more Western and liberal than Pakistanis but despite the two societies have two different conceptions; the attitudes are not entirely different.
I do think South Asia needs a huge dose of libertarianism for a start.
South Asia need rationalism, critical thinking and secularism imposed on the people starting in grade school.
State media needs to take a leading role in disseminating the above concepts. Superstition and religious brainwashing is crippling South Asia.
I agree with both of you. Min, aren’t you from Sri Lanka? Aren’t they way ahead in terms of development, though? I thought, for example, that the Sri Lankan Tamils don’t have a lot of caste issues. Am I naive?
Sri Lanka is far far better off than India, and South India is better off the North India. SL still has some caste issues not just amongst Hindus but Buddhist too though it is not what it used to be.
In terms of development, on the surface SL looks nice and there has been some real improvement since I last visited almost 2.5 decades ago. When I came here last year I was taken back and was quite enthusiatic and optimistic but gradually as I talked to working class people and read papers that are not government shills, my enthusiasim and optimism has greatly eroded.
It is irritating to see Hindus still clinging to religion and waste money on rituals , rituals whos sole purpose is to fleece the masses.
Well, Fijian-Indians (who tend to have a large Dalit representation) are “converting” to Arya Samaj en masse. From what I hear, the Dalits/Sudras in India are ripe for this sort hinduism.
Arya Samaj – No idol worship and rejects the caste system. Invokes the pursuit of knowledge as the purpose of life (as evidenced by the gayatri mantra). Still Hinduism.
This ain’t you’re Daddy’s Hinduism!
Interesting
Because “Hindusim” is NOT one religion. Not all Hindu’s adhere to Vedic rites. Most people do not even know what the Vedas preach. In the broad sense those called “Hindus” worship a personal god of their choice in whatever way they choose to. There is no religious book or authority to dictate how, which is why such beliefs still survive. Superstitions exist because of illiteracy, and rituals exist among the literate, as a continuation of “culture”, not because they are people believe rituals lead to anything meaningful in everyday life.
“Because “Hindusim” is NOT one religion. Not all Hindu’s adhere to Vedic rites. Most people do not even know what the Vedas preach. ”
The Vedas teach sacrifices to the gods, including the sacrifice of all kinds of animals including cows and horses and even humans. Probably most Hindus are not aware of this, but the Brahmin priests are. So the fact that they teach the supremacy of the Vedas as the most authoritative scripture of Hinduism while practicing vegetarianism and cow protection and ritual worship of non-Vedic gods and goddesses is plain hypocrisy and deceit.
What are you so lit about? Leave the Hindus alone. All religions have their inconsistencies. Taking pot-shots at any particular religion is rather small-minded–it’s too easy.
@Sahr
But has any other religion had the negative impact of Hinduism , on the subconitnent. The religion has a core philosophy of inequality and oppression so Hinduism deservers all the criticism it gets and then some. Not all of it is bad as it is a syncretic religion which co-opted benign beliefs.
In the Western hemisphere; Chistianity and Islam has received much criticism , but Hinduism has largely escaped criticism and instead is romanticised and portrayed as passive and non evangelical .
While I follow no religion, I do think that “Hindusim” has been the only belief system in history to have reformed itself so magnificently (I think christianity would be a close second). Starting out with the early Rig Veda with its polytheistic belief system and then independently developing monotheism and monism and 6 other distinct religions(including a form of atheism even before the Buddha), while still maintaining cultural continuity is what keeps “Hinduism” alive.
Take the example of “sacrifice”. Starting out with animal sacrifice in the early Rig Veda, and then going through reform to yield vegetarianism and non-violence is not hypocracy but growth and advancement. Social stratification could not have been propagated without the might of the Kshatriya’s and the wealth of the Vaishyas. The caste system evolved purely as way to grab and keep hold of power (just like caste based politics in India today).
Are you talking about the Vedic religion? As I said earlier, “Hinduism” is not one religion, so there is no argument to be made that it has inequality at its core. The Vedic religion may have this inequality build-in, but it is only followed by the upper castes(Vaishya, Kshatriya and Brahmins). The lower castes typically do not follow this Vedic form of the religion. In the south, people more often than not follow Shaivism and Shaktiism.
FWIW, most Brahmin priests aren’t well-versed in Vedas either (unless your sample of Brahmin priests is bigger than mine). Those who are intelligent enough to decipher the meaning (instead of rote memorization), are now saying that “sacrifice” of any kind mentioned in the Veda is purely “metaphorical” and in some cases blatant mistranslation since Vedic sanskrit is different from standard sanskrit . (Was it ever decided if ‘Oceans’ in Vedas are real oceans or metaphorical oceans referring to milky way? )
So, the arguments evolve…
Speaking of sacrifice…
Several months ago here in Sri Lanka a Hindu temple had animal sacrifices. The animals themselves were mostly purchased at the temple ; a lucrative racket as there would be profit made in selling the animals to devotees.
Well anyways, a Singhala (Buddhist) strongman ot wind of this and barged into the temple accompanied with many muscle; the end result being the temple was stopped from carrying out any further animal sacrifices, because it goes against Buddhist compassion for animals.
Also the “metaphorical” reason is a cop out an revisionism, an attempt at expunging negative aspects of Hinduism. Hinduism also had a horse sacrifice ritual, where a queen/princess simulated copulation over a dead horse.
“Also the “metaphorical” reason is a cop out an revisionism, an attempt at expunging negative aspects of Hinduism. Hinduism also had a horse sacrifice ritual, where a queen/princess simulated copulation over a dead horse.”
Precisely. Who has the authority to reinterpret scripture that is supposedly divinely revealed anyway?
But I thought Hinduism wasn’t a “revealed” religion?
“But I thought Hinduism wasn’t a “revealed” religion?”
The primary scripture of hinduism, the Vedas, is considered Sruthi or revealed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas
The Vedas are apauruṣeya (“not of human agency”).[3][4][5] They are supposed to have been directly revealed, and thus are called śruti (“what is heard”),[6][7] distinguishing them from other religious texts, which are called smṛti (“what is remembered”).
http://indianscriptures.50webs.com/introved.htm
The Vedas are regarded as divine in origin. They are referred to as apaurusheya. They are not produced by a couple of individuals. They are not composed by some poets or authors……………The Vedas are divine and eternal. The Vedas are truly considered to be the boundless repository of “knowledge par excellence”. The Vedas are known as the Shruti literature. The Shruti is treated as the supreme and ultimate authority. The authentic Smriti literature has had its basis in the Shruti. Whenever a difference arises between the Shruti and the Smriti, the Shruti statement is accepted as the final word.
Here is an example of the eternal divine truths revealed in the Vedas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha
I would love to read the “metaphorical” interpretation of this vedic ritual….
Is killing animals banned in Sri Lanka? Just proves that Sri Lankan Buddhists are bullies nothing else.
Vedas are not a single stream of thought – it is a compilation of contradicting thoughts.
+1
what does it mean to be hindu? First ask yourself what it would take to get “kicked out” of the hindu fold… personally, I could eat beef, cross the “kala paani”, I could curse the clergy, i could curse Vishnu himself, praise the Buddha, I could say that the Ramayana was the most boring book i’ve ever read. still, It would not convince people that i am not a hindu. So what can one do? convert to Islam or Christianity… and it helps to change your name to Clarence or Akbar just to highlight the fact…
Hinduism is just what is left over when you take all the Christians, Parsees, Muslims and Jews out of consideration and that is how a hindu was defined legally for some time under the raj.(citation invited)..its like calling someone a spiritual aborigine of the subcontinent.
I think the fundamental problem is that most of you don’t really have an understanding of the hindu religion. Particularly with the likes of MMP & co., it’s only seen through the lens of caste, curry, and cows. The essence of hinduism is dharma (righteousness), which protects rta (order), which is rooted in satya (truth). I’m not going to bother attacking other religions, which very obviously have their own vulnerabilities (ashraf/ajlaf, baccha bazi, spanish and goan inquisition, etc), but merely refute what appears to be a congenital misunderstanding, or purposeful misinterpretation, of hinduism. Regarding the first charge about why Sudras “cling” to hinduism, it has to do with the very purpose of varnashrama dharma (caste is a portuguese word meaning purity). What civilization has not had a division of labor? Or is everyone a banker in the west without the social register types not encouraged to marry among their own? Varnashrama dharma ensures that spiritual, military, and economic power are not all vested in one class, so that a society as a whole can pursue dharma, and ultimately attain liberation over one lifetime, or the course of many. Every civilization naturally has an agricultural/artisan/labor class one which the very foundations of civilization depend. The place of Sudras is, therefore, instrumental within the system. For ignorant commenters who refer to hinduism as brahminical imperialism, remember, the Rama incarnation of lord Vishnu as a kshatriya specifically punished brahmins who grew arrogant and misbehaved (Parashurama and Ravana). Second, as Valmiki and Vishwamitra demonstrate, there was a degree of social mobility to the system, which allowed lower castes to ascend based on their merit or natural inclinations. Brahmins who misbehaved could find themselves be made outcaste. Second, the notion that hinduism was appropriating key ideas such as reincarnation and dharma is asinine. They are at the core of the tradition, and the relationship, was in fact, the other way around. Mahavira and the Buddha both had great messages of nonviolence, but humanity still has the practical reality of facing those who don’t embrace it. The appeal of buddhism is its simplicity and universal accessibility of its philosophies and positions of power. For ignorami who cite mistranslations of the Vedas (with idiotic assertions about human sacrifice or the ashvamedha yagna), you need to understand that the Vedas themselves are not intelligible to the uninitiated. Without a vedic education, you are merely the blind leading the blind in this exercise. The Philosophy of the Vedas is expounded in the brahmanas (texts not the caste) and upanishads–which cover the precise concepts at issue. Indian history has been subject to much subversion ( -100, british imperialism)., as such, the notion that hinduism is the religion with the most negative legacy on the subcontinent is quite the exercise in dumbassery. Regarding the treatment of dalits, yes, India has a long way to go on this count. Hinduism absolutely does have to account for and dramatically improve the condition and treatment of dalits, but the answer is through social reformers such as Vivekananda, and smart government programs, not half-assed attempts by amateurs to reinterpret a tradition to suit their marxist or eurocentric biases in order to pave the way for its ultimate destruction. Judge not lest ye be judged…
@amused
what would you guess to be, as a percentage of the whole, the portion of hindus in India that could recite a single line or verse of the Upanishads, Brahmanas (the text), or Vedas? It would be interesting to know what sort of answers people come up with, and as far as I know this sort of census has not been conducted. But i think it would bring to light the differences in the way many of us view the hindu canonical texts and their relation to the myriad folk religions. my guess is <5%
the notion that hinduism was appropriating key ideas such as reincarnation and dharma is asinine.
The concepts of reincarnation and liberation (moksha/nirvana) are absent in the Vedas. These key concepts along with ahimsa, yoga, vegetarianism etc were stolen from the shramanic traditions. The vedic religion revolved around yajnas or sacrifices. Look up what purushamedha, gomedha, ashvamedha mean then tell us what such cruel sacrifices have to do with yoga and moksha.
The fundamerntal difference is that the Vedas teach of external gods that need to be sacrificed to, while shramanism teaches that the Absolute is found within through meditation.
you need to understand that the Vedas themselves are not intelligible to the uninitiated. Without a vedic education, you are merely the blind leading the blind in this exercise.
In other words only brahmins can understand the Vedas? Unfortunately for you these ancient tactics are unlikely to work with anyone with a brain today. You don’t need to be “initiated” to understand the buddhist scriptures for example. They can be understood translated into any language.
Since you are presumably one of the initiated ones why don’t you explain to us the “eternal truths” behind the necrophilia, bestiality, vulgarity that is part and parcel of the ashvamedha or horse sacrifice?
Vedas themselves are not intelligible to the uninitiated.
Clear proof that brahminism is a scam.
@ ghataprabha
it is precisely because the majority of the population (whatever their caste or creed) is inclined towards materialism rather than spirituality that all are not expected to be acquainted with, let alone recite, the Vedas.After all, how many Christians are steeped in arcane theology or any publication of the Church fathers, such as City of God or Summa Theologica. That is the reason why popular epics are so, and you’ll excuse the pun, popular. According to the Hindu tradition, the Ramayana and Mahabharata are meant as practical reference points for the average person to reconcile the material with the spiritual. These stories serve as examples of how to do one’s duty and protect dharma even in the face of tremendous adversity. Those characters (at least as far as the tradition is concerned, people are obviously welcome to not believe their divinity either) serve as models so that individuals can do the right thing, and eventually reach God through good conduct.
@ Bliss
You can repeat a lie a hundred times–it does not make it the truth. Ideas such as reincarnation and liberation are dealt with extensively in the Upanishads, which expound the philosophy of the Vedas and precede the Buddha. In fact, Vedanta (the philosophy dealing with liberation and ultimate union with the Supreme, monist form of God as Brahman) means the end of the Vedas–literally–meaning that is the whole point. Studying the Vedas is but one means of liberation, through the path of knowledge or yajnic sacrifice. I wouldn’t try to keep arguing this point as you only further expose your own ignorance, as does your continued use of the pejorative term brahminism (esp given that there are analogous terms for other faiths, but I don’t care to insult them as you are insulting hinduism). I am acquainted with the purushamedha and ashvamedha. Unlike you, I have studied both the text and history. Even John Keay’s history mentions how the recorded “historical” practice of the ashvamedha in the Gupta period has no listing of such “romantic duties” for the sacrificed horse. The purushamedha is indeed a metaphor, your insistence to the contrary does not make it so. This is what happens when an amateur attempts to review nuanced texts of which he has no understanding or capacity for. With respect to animal sacrifice in general, yes, it very obviously did exist (as it did in virtually all parts of the ancient world including greece and rome) and continues to. Do I agree with it? No. Should it be banned/phased out post-haste? Yes. But, all traditions have aspects to them that we may not agree with, certain “cruel” religious surgical procedures for young males and females come to mind, but it’s not my place to trash the traditions of my friends and colleagues. Rather than continuing to expose your own ignorance, you would do well to do likewise….
“In other words only brahmins can understand the Vedas? ”
Perhaps the biggest example of your ignorance though, is the fact that you don’t even know that kshatriyas and vaisyas were (and now again are) also initiated into the vedas, since they had the free time and disposable income for such long periods of education required by it. A number of non-brahmins have become great vedic seers themselves (Vishwamitra, Jabala, etc). It was only in the past 800 years, when the entire culture and religion was threatened by external forces that access to it was restricted, for the precise reason that people mess with the text and translation as the british eventually did and as you are now doing. In the current era, it can and should be open to all classes–including dalits–and all members of the faith should be encouraged to study it. The Vedas (at least as far as theists are concerned) come from God, not Brahmins, so unless you yourself are a fundamentalist of some kind, I don’t quite understand your continued frothing over them in particular.
it is precisely because the majority of the population (whatever their caste or creed) is inclined towards materialism rather than spirituality that all are not expected to be acquainted with, let alone recite, the Vedas
The majority of hindus weren’t even allowed to listen to the Vedas, forget about reciting it. The penalty for doing so was having molten lead poured down your ears. As for materialism, the brahmins are as materialistic as they come. For example in the vedic horse sacrifice the brahmins conducting the ritual were not just awarded with loot/tribute collected during the horse’s one year of wandering along with choice cuts of meat from the sacrificed carcass, but they also got their pick of women from the monarch’s harem. In the Sati or widow burning ritual the brahmin killers got to keep the murdered widow’s jewelry. No wonder the brahmins of Calcutta were so upset when the British banned that ancient “religious” custom.
Perhaps the biggest example of your ignorance though, is the fact that you don’t even know that kshatriyas and vaisyas were (and now again are) also initiated into the vedas, since they had the free time and disposable income for such long periods of education required by it
These upper castes or dwijas (twice born) are together a small minority of hindus. Show us where they are initiated into priestly duties. The non-dwijas, the great majority of hindus, weren’t allowed to even listen to the Vedas much less get “initiated” into it regardless of how much free time they had.
@amused you mention, “how many Christians are steeped in arcane theology or any publication of the Church fathers, such as City of God or Summa Theologica”
I asked about familiarity with putative primary texts such as Rg Veda, Upanishad not the great mass of exegetical works that came later over the subsequent thousands of years. And of that familiarity, I posed a minimum recollection of a single verse. So the apt analogy in the christian tradition would be whether the common folk could reproduce snippets of the old or new testament. In my experience, even non-christians in the USA can do this, even if unknowingly because the culture is so steeped in these texts.
I do not question at all that Ramayana and Mahabharata are deeply familiar texts to the masses. these stories along with the Mahisasura mardini myth are ubiquitous, largely because they are part of regional language oral traditions. It is also clear that the rgveda and upanishads are part of the context in which these works were composed. But just as Judaism and other near eastern cultures are the context for the new testament and Quran, the Vedic culture is only the early context for what has become Hinduism. As is much discussed on this site, so many diverse populations have created the cultures of the subcontinent. anthropologists speculate a great deal on which cultural practices originated in which populations. This religion accomodates phallus worship, nirguna bhakti, buffalo sacrifices to Devi, and so much more. It is difficult to agree upon which tradition is the river and which is the tributary..
Studying the Vedas is but one means of liberation, through the path of knowledge or yajnic sacrifice.
Do explain how yajnic sacrifice of innocent animals as taught and practiced in the Vedas leads to liberation? Why does God demand such cruelty towards his own creatures?
Even John Keay’s history mentions how the recorded “historical” practice of the ashvamedha in the Gupta period has no listing of such “romantic duties” for the sacrificed horse.
Assuming that’s true all that would mean is that by the Gupta period they had become ashamed of that obscene vedic ritual. Btw, its amusing how you call bestial necrophilia “romantic”.
With respect to animal sacrifice in general, yes, it very obviously did exist (as it did in virtually all parts of the ancient world including greece and rome) and continues to. Do I agree with it? No. Should it be banned/phased out post-haste? Yes…….The Vedas (at least as far as theists are concerned) come from God
You are running around in circles. If the Vedas come from God then doesn’t banning its teachings mean going against God? What kind of a theist are you if you have disagree with your own God???
“but they also got their pick of women from the monarch’s harem.”
Uhh, no, cite your facts if you are proffering the idiotic. You seem to be living in an imaginary dream world where sophistry and outright falsehood serve as logic and truth. That’s fine, not here to pop your bubble, only commenting to demonstrate how ignorant your statements are (you’re actually doing a splendid job of that on your own…just helping the process).
As for the majority and the Vedas, I’ve already explained why and also disproved your misinformed statement about how only brahmins could study the vedas (since you focus on the ancient, all the kshatriya characters in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata went to gurukul to study and were initiated there and studied the Vedas. That is why kshatriyas such as Yudhisthira and Janaka were considered wiser than the greatest brahmins). The question is why do you think the auto da fe, the inquisition in general, and the continuing scandal (as well as that creepy video by a certain “benedict”) plaguing a certain “universal” institution are ok, modern, ethical and humanistic. In your laundry list of accusations against brahmins, you seem awfully silent regarding the conduct of the sacerdotal classes of another faith–personal agenda?
Your obsession with ancient yajnas no longer in vogue such as the ashvamedha (and continued insistence on prevaricating and misinformng on their actual rituals) rather than modern practice, only demonstrates that deep-seated hate that you have in your heart–clearly the fruits of “rationalism” and “enlightenment”. I referred to your simulational allegations as “romantic duties” because those were the precise words used by Keay himself. Unlike you, I don’t need to lie about facts–I try and back them up with more than assorted “hatehindus.com” provided copy and paste jobs.
“Show us where they are initiated into priestly duties.”
Show me where a non-european became pope. Also, I didn’t say priestly duties in particular (though Vishwamitra in effect was Kshatriya who did become a priest). I said they were initiated in the study of the Vedas. Since you obviously have trouble understanding this, let me reiterate: being a priest and just studying the Vedas as intellectual and spiritual exercise are two different things (hope you can follow).
“Why does God demand such cruelty towards his own creatures?”…”You are running around in circles. If the Vedas come from God then doesn’t banning its teachings mean going against God? What kind of a theist are you if you have disagree with your own God???”
Where does it say that God demands yajnic sacrifice as the only way? So how am I disagreeing with God? Yajnas are A way, not THE way. What’s more, sacrifice of creatures is not a requirement for yajnic sacrifice in general. In your vitriol, you seemed to have missed the fact that the vast majority of yajnas only involve firewood, ghee, fruits, and flowers. But I wonder, do you have the same problem with goats at bakrid or turkey at “Thanks” giving or is your rant not equal opportunity?
Uhh, no, cite your facts if you are proffering the idiotic.
I already provided the link where you can read about the sacrificing priests getting rewarded not only with booty but also with women from the sacrificing king’s own family. Read it and try to be honest next time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha
In a nation with endemic malnourishment the brahmin priests almost invariably sport well padded bellies. There is also the example of devadasism or temple prostitution. I recently read in the news that brahmins are deliberately making mistakes in chanting during vedic rituals if they do not get paid enough. All of which makes a mockery of your claim of brahmin non-materialism.
As for the majority and the Vedas, I’ve already explained why and also disproved your misinformed statement about how only brahmins could study the vedas
You haven’t disproved my point that the great majority of hindus, the sudras and dalits, could not even listen to much less be “initiated” into the Vedas.
Your obsession with ancient yajnas no longer in vogue such as the ashvamedha
You keep clinging to illogical arguments. If the Vedas is the eternal word of God to a theist like you then why are you so proud that modern hindus have renounced it? All you are saying basically is that the word of your God is shameful and unacceptable and therefore no longer “in vogue”. What kind of theism is that?
I didn’t say priestly duties in particular (though Vishwamitra in effect was Kshatriya who did become a priest). I said they were initiated in the study of the Vedas.
Fine, but even by giving you the benefit of the doubt here the issue still remains: the great majority of hindus, the non-dwijas, were considered unworthy of even listening to the Vedas much less being “initiated” into it.
I referred to your simulational allegations as “romantic duties” because those were the precise words used by Keay himself. Unlike you, I don’t need to lie about facts–
OK. John Keay also called it a “problematic” “sexual coupling”. It is proof of your intellectual dishonesty and your illogic that you are dismissing this ritual vedic bestiality as “allegations” while quoting a scholar who discusses the very thing you are denying! Here is what Keay wrote:
Although the arya occasionally practiced human sacrifice, the sacrificial offerings mentioned in the Vedas are predominantly of cattle, representing wealth, and of horses, symbolic of power and virility……In the ashwamedha, or horse sacrifice, a somewhat problematic injunction about the sexual coupling of the sacrificial stallion with the raja’s bride was meant to endow his lineage with exceptional strength…..in the later asvamedha, the horse seems to have been excused romantic duties
Where does it say that God demands yajnic sacrifice as the only way? So how am I disagreeing with God? Yajnas are A way, not THE way.
Another fine example of illogical argumentation. How is that an answer to my question? Explain how sacrificing animals is A way to achieve liberation?
In your vitriol, you seemed to have missed the fact that the vast majority of yajnas only involve firewood, ghee, fruits, and flowers.
Today it is, but in the Vedas, the ultimate authoritative scripture of hinduism, it is not. It still begs the question: how does burning ghee, fruits etc lead to liberation?
Secondly, don’t you think it is obscene to waste food like that when your co-religionists are the hungriest people on earth?
Here is the link to the John Keay quote above:
http://tinyurl.com/7l44n5u
Show me where a non-european became pope.
_______________________________________
Seriously? I am Muslim but even I know that there have been popes from Africa and Asia!
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes
The very first pope was born in Asia, as were numerous others. 14th & 32nd born in Africa, etc., etc. Sheesh. Try to be more “pundit”-like.
@Sahar: They’re about as African as George Orwell was a Bihari
, but of all the outrageous things “Amused” is spouting, that’s what you object to 
@Amused: If you actually knew any Sanskrit, and critically read the Vedas or say Sayana’s commentaries you would find, like pretty much any other ancient religious text, a lot of good poetry, some pretty interesting scientific/astronomical observations that would be accessible with late second millenium BC level of technology, and a bunch of weird shit, including nasty prejudices. This is kind of the people were back then, heck, that’s how people are now, so your strange apologia and running goal-posts defence of Vedic Hinduism is strange.
Since you insist so much on interpretation and other nonsense, here’s a pretty straightforward example from the Rigveda:
” इन्द्रश्चिद्घा तदब्रवीत्स्त्रिया अशास्यं मनः । उतो अह क्रतुं रघुम् ”
Indra himself says woman is of uncontrolled mind. Also her intellect/ability [is] intellect fluid/variable/non-constant.
Quite unambiguously sounds like what a sexist today would say. I could dig up more stuff, but frankly, it’s boring.
Why are they not African or Asian? That’s retarded. Somehow they are “european”? You are crazy. Tunisians are European now?
Why are they not African or Asian? That’s retarded. Somehow they are “european”? You are crazy. Tunisians are European now?
Not now, but during the time period considered, Tunisians and Israelite were much more “European (I mean one of us)” than Gothic tribes of Germany.
I am surprised Sahar has stooped to such adventitious level with mere technical (as defined by present meaning of term Europe) defense.
I mean: I am surprised Sahar has stooped to such argumentative level with mere technical (as defined by present meaning of term Europe) defense.
during the time period considered, Tunisians and Israelite were much more “European (I mean one of us)” than Gothic tribes of Germany.
Tunisia and Israel are in Africa and Asia respectively, not in Europe. What you mean is that they were then part of the Roman Empire while Germany was not. The berbers and hebrews were not the same ethnicity as the italians.
Amused is trying to compare (and justify) the barring of the majority of hindus from initiation into the Vedas with his claim that only europeans were allowed to become Pope. An argument that is not only technically incorrect, as pointed out by Sahar, but also incredibly stupid.
Your point that tunisians and israelis were seen as “one of us” by the italian founders of the Roman Empire only highlights it’s opposite in brahminism in which the majority of hindus were treated as “not one of us” by the dwijas and barred from even listening to the Vedas, much less becoming the (non-existent) hindu equivalent of Pope.
@ Sahar
Your general navel-gazing on the site speaks for itself. Shanth, who clearly is antipodal to me, pretty much hit the nail on the head, so i’ll just leave it at that. Your recent citizenship oath appears to have resulted in an effort to become, and you’ll pardon the phrase, become more catholic than the pope. Instead of speaking in generalities, point out specifically how I’m not being pundit-like. Otherwise, it’s just more hot air as it is with bliss, and your rant is merely the fury of the recent “convert”.
Well, for starters, you could use the term “Western” if you have culture rather than geography in mind (i.e., the way Australia is Western) rather than European, if that’s what you mean. The notion that a 5th Century guy born in Syria is “European” is curious–the culture was somewhat Hellenized, yes, but it’s still an odd way to describe things. It’s not as if these early popes were Europeans who’d moved to West Asia or Africa (that’s why Shanth’s Orwell reference is off-base)–they were indigenous converts. Are modern Albanian or Bosnian Muslims “Asian”? LOL–I guess to you they are.
“It’s not as if these early popes were Europeans who’d moved to West Asia or Africa”
Let me introduce you to the Roman Empire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_empire
There were Roman (as in Italian) colonists spread throughout the territories, so that makes the possibility very likely. Even if we assume ethnic syrian or ethnic carthaginian (the old name for modern tunisia), that still does not change the fact that the likelihood of a black pope is slim to none–so much for universality.
So your charges are as ineffectual as the your initial comment. Unless you have more navel-gazing to contribute, I believe our discussion is at an end. Nice chatting with you.
Yes, well, it’s interesting that you’ve moved from “european” to “black’–yah, you’ve been correct all along (and none of those Tahrir Square protestors are black–or, if they are they are result of recent, not ancient moves–lol), and I am the “navel-gazing” weirdo. People like you, reading from some sort of play-book and not thinking, are the problem in South Asia–not the solution.
Sahar, you didn’t even realize that there were roman colonists in north africa and syria, flatly contradicting your point about how those bishops could not be european. but you ignore that and make some random statement presuming that i’m unhelpful just because i’ve unveiled your ignorance regarding the roman empire and the papacy. the fundamental point is that you will not have a non-european as pope, and even if we give you the benefit of the doubt regarding the carthaginian and syrian popes, you still won’t don’t have a black pope, in spite of subsaharan africa filling oh so many pews. this of course is in stark contrasts to the church’s claims of universality. of course, there’s nothing in my “playbook” about recent transplants to the US masquerading as though they can think independently about big issues while failing to provide any evidence of such…so i guess that means our game is up.
i’ve unveiled your ignorance regarding the roman empire and the papacy. the fundamental point is that you will not have a non-european as pope
The only ignorance you have revealed is your own. Your “fundamental point” has been refuted, yet you deceitfully act like it has not. You had no idea that christianity did not start as an european religion, that the first pope was not european, that a berber St Augustine is a Doctor of the Church, that most of early christianity took shape outside Europe among non-europeans etc etc.
Your attempt to justify brahminical casteist discrimination by claiming equivalence to black-white racism is a stupid and ignorant self-goal. Most brahmins I have seen would be considered black in the West or Far East. The others brown. If brahmin=white then all the brahmins of India are frauds.
Btw, based on your posts I am guessing you are a south indian of the Tamil variety. Correct?
“The only ignorance you have revealed is your own. Your “fundamental point” has been refuted, yet you deceitfully act like it has not. You had no idea that christianity did not start as an european religion, that the first pope was not european, that a berber St Augustine is a Doctor of the Church, that most of early christianity took shape outside Europe among non-europeans etc etc.”
Nice try, dumbass: “Scholars believe that Augustine’s ancestors included Berbers, Latins and Phoenicians.[16] Augustine’s family name, Aurelius, suggests that his father’s ancestors were freedmen of the gens Aurelia. Augustine’s family had been Roman, from a legal standpoint, for at least a century when he was born.[17]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine
As for St. Peter, your contention is idiotic because Christianity had yet to become the official religion of the empire. That was when spiritual and temporal power were welded–good job. And yes, everyone knows Christ and early Christianity were jewish in ethnic orientation. But what’s it matter, you’re too blockheaded to realize that the Church’s political power is controlled in europe by europeans, or are you too cowardly and intellectually bankrupt to admit that?
“Your attempt to justify brahminical casteist discrimination by claiming equivalence to black-white racism is a stupid and ignorant self-goal. Most brahmins I have seen would be considered black in the West or Far East. The others brown. If brahmin=white then all the brahmins of India are frauds.”
No, oh cognitively disadvantaged one. My analogy demonstrated that not all institutions are universal, so your asinine remarks about sudras not being able to become priests are overturned by my point that anyone with minimal brain capacity can realize that non-europeans will not rise to the papacy in the church. You’re so pathetic, you didn’t even realize that Augustine was legally Roman, and had Latin blood–congratulations on elevating yourself to new heights of douchebaggery.
“Btw, based on your posts I am guessing you are a south indian of the Tamil variety. Correct?”
Nope, not even close. I’m guessing based upon your posts you’re a sea urchin of the pacific variety, right?
My analogy demonstrated that not all institutions are universal, so your asinine remarks about sudras not being able to become priests are overturned by my point that anyone with minimal brain capacity can realize that non-europeans will not rise to the papacy in the church.
It is proof of your stupidity that you think that (false) analogy “overturns” the charge of hindu casteist discrimination against sudras. Amuse us by explaining how you managed to reach that asinine conclusion.
you didn’t even realize that Augustine was legally Roman
Speak for yourself. You are the ignorant one here. Are sudras not religiously hindus? So where does that leave your idiotic analogy?
Oh Bliss, you truly are a sad, and pitiful character, aren’t you? It’s not good enough that you got thoroughly spanked in the conversation downthread and had your initial main premise about brahmin imperialism deconstructed, you have to shameless barge into this one in yet another vain attempt to regain some shred of (theoretical) manhood. Truly sad that you cannot see that you’ve been hoisted by your own Augustine petard….
“Are sudras not religiously hindus?”
are subsaharan africans who practice catholicism not catholic? the fact that your limited brain function and own deep seated prejudices mean that you can only view this analogy through a racial rather than an institutional prism demonstrates how thoroughly incapable you are at conducting an intellectual conversation. Worst of all, you apparently don’t realize how you’ve become the object of amusement when you volunteered St. Augustine as a berber not realizing his father was latin from the gens aurelia, and now stumble about with yet another egg on your face. For God’s sake man, spare yourself the punishment. Seriously, I’m starting to feel bad for you.
are subsaharan africans who practice catholicism not catholic?
There are quite a few subsaharan africans and indians who are cardinals of the church, and technically eligible to be elected Pope. Again, no valid analogy with the status of sudras in hinduism.
Why aren’t you explaining how your analogy “overturns” the charge of discrimination against sudras? Even assuming that it is a true analogy (which it is not), how do two wrongs make it right in your twisted brain?
Frankly it baffles me why the sudras have put up with this BS for so long.
Oh really? And are they berber too? hahaha. does it change the fact that none of them will actually become pope? how have africans put up with this bs for so long given the church’s legacy there and among indigenous peoples…
seriously though, man. I am sensing some deep-seated psychological hurt here. is that the reason for the bitterness? something in the distant past? is that why you continue to skip over questions regarding the catholic church? the very mention of those charges against the church seems to make all your lovely smiley faces disappear? bad memories?”
Oh really? And are they berber too? hahaha.
Berbers are north africans you ignoramus. Do you even know what “subsaharan” means?
I know oh oafish, cognitive defective. And I while I know you’re too dense to realize that St. Augustine was roman, I thought you’d at least have the basic reasoning capability to pick up a sarcastic reference to your previous blunder, a point which you yourself volunteered and got demolished on. Alas, it appears I gave you too much credit, and your lack of knowledge is coupled with your lack of shame in perpetuating a debate you’ve long since lost–multiple times.
you’re too dense to realize that St. Augustine was roman
This is coming from the ignoramus who does not know that ethnic berbers, egyptians, hebrews, syrians, arabs, armenians etc could be roman citizens.
I don’t know where you got the idea that only europeans could be roman citizens. You are stupidly projecting the British Empire’s racist exclusiveness to which indians, africans etc were subjected to onto the Romans.
“This is coming from the ignoramus who does not know that ethnic berbers, egyptians, hebrews, syrians, arabs, armenians etc could be roman citizens.”
no duncecap. you said augustine was a berber, when his father came from the roman gens aurelia and was a latin. ergo, augustine was a roman by blood and citizenship. but continue to erect strawmen, you appear to have a fascination with them.
“I don’t know where you got the idea that only europeans could be roman citizens.”
point out where i said, oh shameless one.
you’ve been trounced again (and again and again and again)–go home.
Saying that there will never be a black pope is as ignorant as the people who said there will never be a black american president. Probably there will be a desi catholic us president first (jindal) and I’m sure that burns you up too, amused. have fun w/ the open defecators back in glorious homeland.
Sahar, those who live glass houses, should not throw stones. Frankly, pakistan shouldn’t really be bragging about open defecation since the whole country is going to shit. oh, and this too: http://www.irinnews.org/Report/77155/PAKISTAN-Open-defecation-free-communities-one-village-at-a-time
but of course, you’re now an american who claims to have dated enough mayflower descendants to have speeded herself along in the nativizing process, in tandem with the star spangled banner wall paper. You can fret all you want about black popes, but the fact of the matter is there hasn’t been one. Perhaps you should go back to telling me how europeans never settled in Africa and Asia in roman times…
you said augustine was a berber, when his father came from the roman gens aurelia and was a latin. ergo, augustine was a roman by blood and citizenship
Augustine’s mother was a north african berber. Your own link mentioned that he had berber along with phoenician and latin ancestry. Neither berbers nor phoenicians are europeans. At best he was only partially european.
Its amusing how you keep avoiding my question: how does your analogy justify brahmin discrimination against your fellow hindu and fellow desi sudras? What you are trying to imply is that there is a racial difference between the dwijas and non-dwijas like between europeans and subsaharan africans and that somehow justifies not allowing sudras to even listen to the Vedas. Which is both laughably delusional and wickedly obscene at the same time.
I can’t tell brahmins apart from low caste hindus but apparently you see them as distinct as black and white
Btw, googling brahmins and animal sacrifice throws up these pictures; show us the difference between them and sudras, tribals and dalits?
http://tinyurl.com/7txczdf
Googling chamars, who are dalits or outcastes, shows these images:
http://tinyurl.com/6s32nwx
“Augustine’s mother was a north african berber. Your own link mentioned that he had berber along with phoenician and latin ancestry. Neither berbers nor phoenicians are europeans. At best he was only partially european.”
I know, that’s why unlike you I pasted the full text right away. The problem is you still don’t realize that you yourself volunteered augustine as an example, said he was a berber (without mentioning his latin paternal roots), and then attempted to pass off your demolishment as a victory because he’s only european on his father’s side from the roman gens aurelia. To add to your predicament, you then tried to pretend like he was merely a roman citizen. It’s only now that you acknowledge his european patrimony to attempt to relegitimize yourself in the eyes of discerning readers.
“Its amusing how you keep avoiding my question: how does your analogy justify brahmin discrimination against your fellow hindu and fellow desi sudras?”
I didn’t avoid it. I squarely answered it when I pointed out that not every institution is universal in all religions, but now the past must be corrected and all hindu institutions opened to all hindus. Blacks, or more generally, non-europeans, not ascending to the papacy is an example of this. The fact that you see a racial prism when I said no such thing nor have any such view (i’m more with the autochthonous rather than AMT crowd, and so, don’t believe in the whole aryan-dravidian nonsense) only demonstrates your own prejudices.
“Googling chamars, who are dalits or outcastes, shows these images”
At long last, I think I understand your bitterness, Bliss. I’m sorry for any discrimination you or your family members may have faced as a result of your caste. I understand the disgusting treatment that jats in particular (but of course all castes in general) mete out to the chamar community particularly in the uk. We can continue to trade insults if you like, but I harbor no prejudice to members of your community and will be the first to smack anyone who speaks derogatorily to members of the chamar community in particular, and dalits in general. It is an unfortunate legacy, and one that I sincerely hope can be remedied.
All I can say is that further hate and national denial will not get anyone anywhere. On the flipside, I am a fan of the eponymous hummer bhangra song. Hopefully, more such songs in the future will help boost community pride for chamars as it did for the jats.
“Indra himself says woman is of uncontrolled mind. Also her intellect/ability [is] intellect fluid/variable/non-constant.”
Does politically correct means men= women?
@Shanth
“This is kind of the people were back then, heck, that’s how people are now, so your strange apologia and running goal-posts defence of Vedic Hinduism is strange.”
Have I defended everything? No. Obviously, I have come down strongly against untouchability as well as general casteism (such as foolish brahmins who talk of iq and reservations–clearly (and rather ironically) the dumbest statement in that whole debate). What I am against is speculation by amateurs touting unproven, disproven, and downright moronic assertions and speculations regarding the hindu tradition. My only point is, and I know 1 or 2 of the authors of the site routinely hold at least one other tradition to account, is to shine the light equally. I know this particular post is about dalits, so naturally hinduism is more than deserving of the lion’s share of attention. But when people make statements like how hinduism has the most negative legacy, then I’m naturally justified in debating it and other dubious statements.
Second, if you actually knew anything about scripture, you’d know that in that most “condemned and hated and sexist and casteist of texts”, to which bliss, whether he knew it or not, was obliquely referring, would also know that the Manu Smriti also states this: “Where women are honored, there the Gods are pleased. But where they are not honored, no sacred rite yields rewards. “Manu Dharma Shastras 3.55-56. Come back when you have more to offer than poorly researched pickings. If you have specific, logical counterarguments to my points vis-a-vis bliss, address them. Otherwise you are just wasting people’s time with your directionless rant.
@prashanth
“Is killing animals banned in Sri Lanka? Just proves that Sri Lankan Buddhists are bullies nothing else.”
In this case, it was wanton killing of animals . Ofcourse Singhala Buddhist Nationalists have no problem with wanton killing of Tamils. Buddhisn in SL is currently dominated by ethno-Buddhism.
Still when it comes to such wanton killing as is the case with Hindu temple sacrifice, I side with the Singhala strongman.
@ Bliss
Yeah, providing a dubiously composed wikilink is great support. No, show me the specific primary source and the text that says that. Include the block for such a dubious statement.
Accordingly, you’ve already been demolished. You were braying above how hinduism is brahmin imperialism, but then have been futilely grasping at straws when you were told that vaishyas and kshatriyas also engaged in vedic study and an avatar of Vishnu was specifically meant to punish misbehaving brahmins. So you’re done. You’ve been disproved. Go home.
Additionally, your illogical statements about brahmins and materialism only shows how little you understand hinduism. Brahmin’s are custodians of spirituality, kshatriyas representatives of military power, and vaishyas the drivers of economic power. That does not mean that mean or most individuals do not fail in their duties. There are of course many (likely most) brahmins who sin and forget their purpose and pursue material ends, just as members of other castes do so, irrespective of whether they are in secular vocations or pursue priestly duties. Are catholic priests ordained to criminally sin as they have done? Apparently, according to your ridiculous logic.
This of course does not leave out the fact that your untoward focus on potbellied brahmins in a land of malnourishment only continues to demonstrate your animus towards them. Hate is not good, child. So calm down and become more “rational”. 20% of American children suffer from food insecurity http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/impact-of-hunger.aspx. Why do catholic priests eat so well?
“You haven’t disproved my point that the great majority of hindus, the sudras and dalits, could not even listen to much less be “initiated” into the Vedas”
No, your point was about hinduism being tantamount to brahmin imperialism, which is why you advocate a bloody rampage against them, so you’re done. You’ve been disproved. Unlike you, however, I attempt to address all counterpoints (the fact that yours have become increasingly sparse only demonstrates what desperate straits you are in).
Dalits are generally those who pursue or pursued professions that were either unfortunately classified as spiritually impure or were themselves members of the four castes who had sinned so greatly as to be made outcaste. They according to the logic (rightly or wrongly) of the schema, would naturally not have been eligible for initiation. Untouchability, though legally outlawed, must end socially as well.
Sudras, as I mentioned above, are the agricultural/artisan/labor class which forms the foundation of civilization. Without them, society is impossible. If all of them had been initiated in studying the Vedas, who would be tending the fields and carpentering and cooking? Do factory workers in America pursue a master’s degree? Did all the children of peasants and serfs study with all the children of european nobility? So your argument is neither here nor there.
“You keep clinging to illogical arguments. If the Vedas is the eternal word of God to a theist like you then why are you so proud that modern hindus have renounced it?”
Where have I said this? I only said animal sacrifice must cease, and your statements on the ashvamedha and purushamedha are idiotic. The Vedas don’t require animal sacrifice. They merely describe yajnic sacrifice in general and consider it a valid means of liberation. Who said anything about stopping yajnas that continue today involving ghee, firewood, fruits and flowers? Why haven’t you responded to my statement on goats and bakrid?
In sum, you failed to address my counterpoints regarding other religions, and your counterarguments (such as brahmins and harems) borders on the ridiculous. All you embody is hatred towards a religious tradition have you no understanding of, and were indoctrinated to unthinkingly attack. Come back when you actually study it rather than perusing hatehindu sites in your spare time.
I only said animal sacrifice must cease, and your statements on the ashvamedha and purushamedha are idiotic. The Vedas don’t require animal sacrifice. They merely describe yajnic sacrifice in general and consider it a valid means of liberation.
Why must animal sacrifice cease? Isn’t it taught and practiced in the Vedas, the word of your God?
You are totally incapable of arguing logically: you cannot claim that the Vedas is the eternal “word of God” and then demand that it’s teachings and practices “must cease”.
Very presumptuous of you to overrule your own God. There must be a punishment for that.
“Very presumptuous of you to overrule your own God. There must be a punishment for that. ”
Well, that is presumptuous of you that Hindu God is so revengeful. One of the most celebrated devotee in South India sings the best insults towards his God for ignoring him. So yeah, no problem there.
The whole Hindu code is to keep society stable and running. Almost every “rule” and “ritual” comes with a preface at the beginning of the discourse, “according to time, location, practice..”
And that’s exactly what Amused is advocating.
In any case, stratified society is the result of full meritocracy ..Don’t you read Razib?
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/08/the-end-of-environmental-inequality-means-the-rise-of-genetic-inequality/
“ Here is the link to the John Keay quote above:”
Yeah, I know, I cited John Keay precisely for that reason—I have his book at home. Even a historian who subscribed to that view regarding the ashavamedha recognized that historical practice as evidenced by the Gupta period did not match and specifically includes that in his text. That’s what calls into question the entire “scholarly” construct by western scholars and the continued insistence of people who claim the sexual angle to the ashvamedha in spite of historical practice disproving it. Of course, recognizing that involves subtlety and nuance—neither of which appear to be a specialty of yours.
On a side note, you can’t even cite correctly. Keay writes” In the ashwamedha, or horse sacrifice, a somewhat problematic injunction about the sexual coupling of the sacrificial stallion with the raja’s bride was meant to endow his lineage with exceptional strength…..in the later asvamedha, the horse seems to have been excused romantic duties” not “;problematic’ ‘sexual coupling’”. The injunction itself what is being referred to and utilized as a basis for that view and his statement, not Vedic historical practice. Big difference Mr. Bestiality.
“Another fine example of illogical argumentation. How is that an answer to my question? Explain how sacrificing animals is A way to achieve liberation?
In your vitriol, you seemed to have missed the fact that the vast majority of yajnas only involve firewood, ghee, fruits, and flowers.
Today it is, but in the Vedas, the ultimate authoritative scripture of hinduism, it is not. It still begs the question: how does burning ghee, fruits etc lead to liberation?”
No it’s not. Where in the Vedas does it say that animal sacrifice is a requirement for liberation? Fruits, ghee, etc are all offerings to God. Even sacrifices aren’t the ONLY way only ONE way. There is still jnana, bhakti, karma, raja yoga and a host of others. The primary requirement is thinking of God, which is what one does during sacrifice. Trust me, we don’t want to go into other religions and their pathways to heaven. Offering fruits, ghee, etc is hardly the most questionable of paths.
“Secondly, don’t you think it is obscene to waste food like that when your co-religionists are the hungriest people on earth?”
Don’t you think it’s obscene for catholic priests and pontiffs to live in the luxury they do and what some of them do behind closed doors in spite of the teachings of Christ? The same Brahmins who do the yajnas also run mathas and temples that distribute food to the poor and educate underprivileged children. So your point about sacrifices is ridiculous. Why do catholic priests need to eat so well—especially the ones as you point out in India and Africa? You’ve yet to answer this, as well as my point about goats and bakrid.
“Fine, but even by giving you the benefit of the doubt here the issue still remains: the great majority of hindus, the non-dwijas, were considered unworthy of even listening to the Vedas much less being “initiated” into it.”
No, you’re done. The entire edifice you’ve constructed has been collapsed. Your primary point about brahminical imperialism has been disproven given your arguments in bad faith and your academic dishonesty regarding Brahmins and harems. You were challenged to give the textual support and you failed to do so. You’ve been discredited. I gave you an explanation about why Sudras in general weren’t initiated but those who’ve shown the inclination or merit like Jabala and Valmiki can and have become initiated in the Vedas. You’ve done no such thing with your Brahmin harem remark.
As I’ve said before, you’ve been disproven. That’s why you’re resorting to posturing with smiley faces and silly remarks about how my view about animal sacrifices merits divine punishment—you’re out of ammunition. The only thing is you don’t have the shame to recognize that and continue to cling to whatever straws you can. Nice try, but you’re done.
Even sacrifices aren’t the ONLY way only ONE way. There is still jnana, bhakti, karma, raja yoga and a host of others.
The various yogas are not taught in the Vedas. The sacrifices are.
How do animal sacrifices lead to liberation? Why do you want them to cease if they are ONE way to liberation? Who gave you the authority to overrule the Vedas?
The same Brahmins who do the yajnas also run mathas and temples that distribute food to the poor and educate underprivileged children.
Were the lower castes even allowed to enter the maths and temples? Brahmins are not exactly known for their charitable works. Quite the opposite. Does India look like a place that cares for its poor? Why? Because the brahmins teach that its their karma to suffer.
Here is an example of how brahmins exploit the superstitious and gullible poor to feed themselves:
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/dalits-rolling-in-brahmin-leftovers-to-end-soon/220216-60-116.html
As part of the Shasti festival, Brahmins would be served food on plantain leaves and when they are finished, people would roll over the leftovers. The Dalits here still participate in the 500-year old ritual, and the belief is that it will cure skin diseases.
That’s what calls into question the entire “scholarly” construct by western scholars and the continued insistence of people who claim the sexual angle to the ashvamedha in spite of historical practice disproving it
How does the perverted vedic ritual of bestiality being foregone in the Gupta period disprove its existence in the Vedas? Thats as stupid as saying that since the vedic horse and cow sacrifices are no longer conducted today that proves they never were, despite all the descriptions and explanations of such sacrifices in the Vedas.
“The various yogas are not taught in the Vedas. The sacrifices are.”
You appear to have continuing difficulty with cognitive function, so I will repeat myself. The philosophies of the Vedas are expounded in the Upanishads, where yoga is discussed extensively. But of course, your uncontainable vitriol for hinduism and brahmins blinds you from realizing this no matter how many times it’s repeated.Also, as an additional point, sacrifices are primarily discussed in the Yajur Veda–there are three other Vedas.
“How does the perverted vedic ritual of bestiality being foregone in the Gupta period disprove its existence in the Vedas? Thats as stupid as saying that since the vedic horse and cow sacrifices are no longer conducted today that proves they never were, despite all the descriptions and explanations of such sacrifices in the Vedas.”
No, Mr.Bestiality, it does not. It demonstrates how both the theory and subscription to it is flawed. Misinterpretations of the Ashvamedha are contradicted by actual historical practice of it. The sad attempt to say it merely means that it was practiced one way in the vedic period and another way in the gupta period is idiotic, since the hindu haters who concocted the theory (keay is merely regurgitating what he read since it’s a general history and he is no expert in comparative religion or the vedic period) weren’t qualified to interpret the vedas to begin with. Many words in sanskrit have 20 meanings, depending on the context. It is only by knowing which meaning is related to which context can the determination be made about the text itself. The very fact that historical practice contradicts the moronic theory regarding the raja’s queen simulating acts and the ashvamedha shows how hollow the theory is to begin with. You can deny it all you want, but it only shows that theory is not the only thing that is hollow…
Your remaining misguided rants don’t merit a response (particular the dalit leftover charge given the religious humiliation a particular faith prescribes for nonbelievers. But given that this site, as I mentioned, has 1 or 2 authors who already shine light on such things, I’ll avoid doing so). They also don’t merit a response since you continue to fail to respond to my points about the catholic church and its treatment of children, and according to recent allegations nuns, as well as bakrid goats and animal cruelty.
Most glaringly YOU FAILED to provide textual proof regarding your brahmins and harems idiocy. A link without corresponding text is not proof (the word harem isn’t even in the link). The fact that you don’t furnish the text is either cowardice or intellectual bankruptcy, which is it? Or is it both? Either way, you lose.
as an additional point, sacrifices are primarily discussed in the Yajur Veda–there are three other Vedas
The Yajur Veda is the “word of God” according to you. So why are you ashamed of it? If animal sacrifices are ordained by your God in your holiest, most authoritative scripture, why do you want to ban them just to be “in vogue”???
Also, where is your explanation for how vedic animal sacrifices lead to liberation?
It demonstrates how both the theory and subscription to it is flawed. Misinterpretations of the Ashvamedha are contradicted by actual historical practice of it.
Unfortunately for your irrational argument giving the much later Gupta period precedence over the Vedic period, the Asvamedha was conducted in the Ramayana, also a hindu scripture, and Queen Kausalya slept with the sacrificed horse:
http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga14/bala_14_frame.htmhttp://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga14/bala_14_frame.htm
Queen Kausalya desiring the results of ritual disconcertedly resided one night with that horse
Most glaringly YOU FAILED to provide textual proof regarding your brahmins and harems idiocy. A link without corresponding text is not proof (the word harem isn’t even in the link).
You are pitifully grabbing at straws. Look up the meanings of the word harem:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harem
a group of women associated with one man
In that link 4 wives of the rajah are mentioned. Now put two and two together, genius.
No, Mr. Bestiality. Here is the link you provided upthread: http://www.brownpundits.com/?p=7122#comment-10721
and here is the statement that you were seeking to misinterpret to mask your intellectual dishonesty: “At the conclusion of the ritual Dasharatha symbolically offers his other wives to the presiding priests, who return them in exchange for expensive gifts (1.14.35). ”
You specifically said “For example in the vedic horse sacrifice the brahmins conducting the ritual … got their pick of women from the monarch’s harem. “. When that’s not at all the case. Then you offered the wiki link as proof here: http://www.brownpundits.com/?p=7122#comment-10643. So that was your reliance.
Anyone with half a brain can see that the brahmin is not receiving the pick of a harem (your pointless webster’s link aside), merely a symbolic offering as part of the ritual which is duly returned to the king. Good job, einstein. You lose. Keep fighting it though–you’ll only get more tangled in the web…
You still have yet to answer whether the catholic church teaches pedophilia to its priests and the bakrid goats. Yet you continue to hold onto the straws of kausalya symbolically lying beside the dead horse as evidence of bestiality and necrophilia when neither actually take place. Even the valmiki Ramayana text doesn’t back up your assertion since the literal text is this: “Queen Kausalya desiring the results of ritual disconcertedly resided one night with that horse that flew away like a bird. [1-14-34]” http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga14/bala_14_frame.htm
But of course, pasting literal text as demanded would prevent you from obfuscating your continual defeat and, thus, is evidence of both your cowardice and intellectual bankruptcy. And YOU flat out LIED that you had provided any proof for how brahmins had a pick of the monarch’s harem. What more need be said? Your main premise about brahmin imperialism was collapsed, you continue to avoid answering questions about the catholic church and bakrid, and yet are shameless enough to continue to posture as though your contentions have been validated. I guess what they say is true. Ignorance truly must be Bliss…
(my response to your flub about brahmin’s and harems is awaiting moderation, so repasting it without links)
No, Mr. Bestiality. Here is the link you provided upthread: “I already provided the link where you can read about the sacrificing priests getting rewarded not only with booty but also with women from the sacrificing king’s own family. Read it and try to be honest next time:
wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha
and here is the statement that you were seeking to misinterpret to mask your intellectual dishonesty: “At the conclusion of the ritual Dasharatha symbolically offers his other wives to the presiding priests, who return them in exchange for expensive gifts (1.14.35). ”
You specifically said “For example in the vedic horse sacrifice the brahmins conducting the ritual … got their pick of women from the monarch’s harem. “. When that’s not at all the case. Then you offered the wiki link as proof. So that was your reliance.
Anyone with half a brain can see that the brahmin is not receiving the pick of a harem (your pointless webster’s link aside), merely a symbolic offering as part of the ritual which is duly returned to the king. Good job, einstein. You lose. Keep fighting it though–you’ll only get more tangled in the web…
You still have yet to answer whether the catholic church teaches pedophilia to its priests and the bakrid goats.
You keep yakking about this as if it is somehow relevant to the topic here. This post is about Hinduism not Christianity or Islam.
Personally, I think it is an insult to human intelligence to consider the Vedas, Bible or Quran to be the eternal Word of God. I have done to Muslim and Christian fundamentalists what I am doing to you here….
Even the valmiki Ramayana text doesn’t back up your assertion since the literal text is this: “Queen Kausalya desiring the results of ritual disconcertedly resided one night with that horse”
Why the hell was Queen Kausalya required to spend a night with the horse? Why was she embarrassed/disconcerted by what the Vedic ritual required her to do?
Alas, poor Bliss. We knew him well. Completely skipping over the fact that his little attempted shenanigan with his “brahmins having their pick of the king’s harem” line was thoroughly debunked, he sought to save face however he could with ever more desperate bleating.
Suffocated by his own web of deceit, he continued to gasp for breath, reaching–straining–for any straw he could grasp, and avoided answering any question regarding bakrid and the catholic church’s pedophilia, and vainly attempted to force his preferred interpretation to a text that doesn’t give him what he was looking for. With his brahminical imperialism contention demolished he thrashed about wildly hoping to find some way to redeem himself.
He can pretend that his intellectual dishonesty about brahmins and harems has not been unveiled, but oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. May he find Bliss in the afterlife…
You specifically said “For example in the vedic horse sacrifice the brahmins conducting the ritual … got their pick of women from the monarch’s harem. “. When that’s not at all the case. Then you offered the wiki link as proof. So that was your reliance.
And I was right. Wikipedia provides the links to the translations of the Vedas. Did you bother to check them? And the Ramayana link also confirms that the priests get women from the raja’s harem aka his wives/concubines etc. Its silly to think that was symbolic, that is just the author’s spin. The word symbolic is not mentioned in the sanskrit words he translated.
By the way its amusing that you approvingly quote that the women are returned to the Raja in exchange for “expensive gifts”. Didn’t you claim that brahmins are supposed to be non-materialistic? The Vedas and Puranas themselves make a liar out of you.
Suffocated by his own web of deceit, he continued to gasp for breath, reaching–straining–for any straw he could grasp
Thanks for describing yourself to a T and making me laugh
More from the Ramayana link:
http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga14/bala_14_frame.htm
Then that king is gladdened at heart for the successful achievement of the completion of that excellent ritual that removes sin and that leads to heaven as well, and that which cannot be undertaken by many of the best kings. [1-14-57b, 58a]
There is no mention of liberation/moksha. The Yajur Veda is still at the primitive level of animal sacrifices and heaven. The concepts of yoga, samsara (reincarnation) and moksha (liberation) were co-opted later from sramanic spirituality.
This is right. But I think both of you (Bliss and Amused) are taking extreme positions on Brahmins.
Here is what Collins had to say about the rise of Buddhism: “It is apparent from the Upanishads that the prestige of the Brahmans was breaking down and their distinctness from the political-military kshatriya caste was crumbling….Certainly, Buddhism was a challenge to the traditional brahmin practices, attacking its rituals and especially its sacrifices by the doctrine of ahimsa, non-harming. But Buddhism should be seen as more of a reform movement within the milieu of the educated religious people – who were mostly Brahmans – rather than a rival movement from outside. Thus, although the Buddha himself was a kshatriya the largest number of monks in the early movement were of Brahman origin. In principle, the Sangha was open to any caste; and since it was outside the ordinary world, caste had no place in it. Nevertheless, virtually all monks were recruited from the upper two classes. The biggest source of lay support, however, the ordinary donor of alms, were the landowning farmers.”
Source: Randall Collins. The sociology of philosophies: a global theory of intellectual change. Harvard University Press, 2000. P.205
finally someone jumping into moderate… you made a point up thread about there being no unifying hindu religion. i don’t see why its so hard for people to get that. most people i know in India(especially southern and eastern indians) have no problem getting it, but the way “hinduism” is presented as a world religion in schools in the US & UK make it very difficult for people to change their mental model of it. to complicate matters, both right-wing hinditva types and christian/muslim anti-hindus have the SAME vested interest in holding up the myth of an authentic hindu orthodoxy that has pan-indian clout. the former to inflate the sense of their strength or to will it into existence, and the latter to make it an all-or-nothing game for oppressed. build the straw man of hinduism out of the worst of its inegalitarian tendencies. In a way Dalits and other so-called backward communties could find a great deal of dignity in moving towards more aboriginal customs like shaktism and shaivism and perhaps honoring the epics in their regional language forms. in my region and neighboring ones, the priests of the local gods and spirits come from diverse communities like toddy-tappers, carpenters, masons, and even butchers have special roles to play. this is the peoples religion and it gets not even a sentence in social studies and geography textbooks in the west.
@ Miso Soup, I saw your previous comments, but refrained from jumping in since I’ve taken up more than enough space on the thread. Since you are specifically calling me out here, i am replying.
First of all, you’re wrong about moksha not being a vedic concept. The vedas don’t go into detailed philosophical discussion, the brahmanas (attached to the same period) and upanishads do. Not recognizing this, means one doesn’t understand vedanta.The primary upanishads aren’t even contemporaneous with buddhism and precede it. Theories can’t be concocted in a vacuum without consulting those of the tradition actually trained to preserve and intepret.
My position on brahmins is hardly extreme. Many secular (and I mean that in both senses) as well as non-secular brahmins are indeed terrible casteists and still others have abused their positions (as do all human beings). The rhetoric in the reservations debate is absolutely idiotic (though I would argue that only dalits merit reservations rather than the ambiguous obc classification). But the problem is there are far too many crackpot theories floating around about hinduism being brahminical imperialism circulated by people who have no understanding of the religion. That is why I even posted on this thread to begin with.
But there is a problem when you and ghataprabha take the seemingly marxist view regarding popular religion versus orthodoxy. Shaivism is not distinct from the hindu tradition, otherwise explain kashmir shaivism. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism. Shaktism is essential to hinduism, as anyone remotely acquainted with the puranas would realize. There are certainly aboriginal traditions and deities (such as the namesake goddess of dantewada) which are discernible and distinct, and should be preserved, but advocating that for those with the specific heritage is a whole other thing altogether.
Also, ghataprabha’s point is neither here nor there. The rss types, unlike the christian and muslim evangelists, don’t seek the convert the world to hinduism, merely preserve it in India.Also, saying there is no unifying hinduism because of distinct traditions and philosophies is tantamount to saying there’s no unifying islam because of shi’ism and ismailism or unifying christianity cause of protestantism and mormonism, et al. In fact, one can argue that the attempt to deconstruct serves to weaken any tradition, an idea echoed by ghataprabha’s concern about rss types strengthening the tradition.
Ultimately, it’s apparent that many have deep-seated views of certain religions, which is why left-field hypotheses are being accepted without any remotely corresponding attempt at scientific validation. The result is an echo chamber that claims a monopoly on truth. You gentlemen/ladies are welcome to your views, but I am also welcome to explain why they’re incorrect. Whether you are open to the possibility of an alternative explanation is another matter all together. Have a nice day.
I did not say Shaivism/Shaktiism is distinct from Hindu tradition, rather that it is distinct from Vedic tradition. Also, the Upanishads are post Vedas and are thus the Vedantas. They do not form part of the srauta texts. By this time, Vedic thought had ended and other schools had started to flourish already. The beauty of the history of Dharmic religions in India is that they have wielded together all the different distinct thoughts together so that there is harmony instead of religious warfare. For example, the Satavahanas for some time, worshipped Buddha as an incarnate of Vishnu, and patronized both Hindu and Buddhist schools.
It is true, Hinduism is not equal to Brahmin Imerialism (and neither is Vedic Hinduism), but as you say, Brahmins as well as Kshatriya and Vaishya, have used religion as a tool to hold on to power.
“Also, the Upanishads are post Vedas and are thus the Vedantas.”
@Miso soup, ghataprabha did make the statement regarding shaivism. Sorry for injecting myself in the overall conversation, but I was addressing both of your remarks with one comment, when i should have split them. Also there aren’t Vedantas, there is vedanta, which is the end of the vedas. It is the philosophical explanation dealing with the purpose and end of the Vedas centerd on brahman (the universal supersoul. sorry, i imagine you are privy to all this, so not meaning to talk down to you, but as you can see from my discussion with a certain recalcitrant party, it’s best to be clear). A number of the primary Aranyakas such as the Brihad, are coevally grouped with the Vedas.
Perhaps the best way to explain is that it boils down to whether we pursue a theistic or nontheistic view on the origin of the Vedas. In the hindu tradition, they are revealed by God, with brahmanas and upanishads explaining their purpose and motivating philosophy. The very word upanishad means near down sit, demonstrating their explicative purpose. Indeed, understanding them this way sheds light on why they Vedas are the way they are. Of course, if one pursues the nontheistic approach, teh Vedas become less clear and victim to odd comparative philosophy theories, though even here, we find coevally composed Aranyakas and Brahmanas.
You are correct that there is a rich tradition of patronage of heterodox sects. Not only the satavahanas, but also the guptas, the vardhanas, and palas, among many others. Modern India should continue in this tradition.
Regarding your last point, yes upper castes have abused their power, as have the elites in other religions, whether it’s arabs in islam or europeans with christianity. This must be rectified poste-haste. But if we only view things through the lens of class and power, we misunderstand the rich message on living a fulfilled life that religion has to offer. The answer I would proffer is balance. Of course, while I’m saying this, I would also qualify it by saying people should be free to be atheist/agnostic as well (but it was a given in my mind to begin with). Marketplace of ideas and all that…
@amused
although the tone of the conversation between bliss and you has taken a negative turn, do not mistake any or at least most of us for wanting to silence your viewpoint. wanted to clarify a statement of yours and make an important distinction. you say:
“Shaivism is not distinct from the hindu tradition, otherwise explain kashmir shaivism. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism. Shaktism is essential to hinduism, as anyone remotely acquainted with the puranas would realize”
i do not consider “hindu tradition” and “hinduism” to be interchangeable terms. I’ve never challenged that there is a coherent indic culture that we can call the hindu tradition. its just that there are so many philosophical and spiritual orders within it and they do not have a fundamental unity of intent. the term hinduism to me is quite like hellenism, a philisophical identiity born of an ethnonym. hinduism isn’t a religion because it doesn’t govern itself. there are groups, castes, sect or otherwise that are hindu in this cultural sense that have stronger internal government and do not submit to any authority above their own.
no one is trying to say that the hindu identity is arbitrary mumbo-jumbo, its just that it seems more apt to call it a super-religious phylum comprising classes of religions that can be at odds with each other much in the way of judaism, christianity, and islam…the history of india is replete with sectarian conflict. in the interests of nationalism it would be nice to put up a common front to the world, and that is what had been attempted during the colonial period with brahmo samaj and all, to safeguard indians from christian evangelism by giving them them an identity as members of a major world religion and boost self-respect.
the term hinduism to me is quite like hellenism
Except that Hellenism did not have an ultimate scriptural authority aka the Word of God which only a hereditary caste could be initiated into.
@ghataprabha.
No, I definitely appreciate the more sincere approach that you and miso have taken. But as you can see, my encounters with intellectual honesty have thus far been limited here (present company excluded of course). I definitely respect your individual rights to have views of your own, and have no desire to attempt to argue my way to convincing everyone to share mine–homogeneity, especially of opinion, is boring.
That said, based on your remarks, I think we agree more than we both initially realized. I absolutely recognize the need for the dalit community for maintaining self-respect while remaining connected to the national indic culture. Frankly, I perfectly empathize with Ambedkar’s move to and advocacy of Buddhism, along with other more recent movements.
I think it was either you or miso who discussed fijian-indians gravitating towards arya samaj. Whoever it was, I actually had a long discussion with a fijian-indian bus driver some time back regarding how his community struggled to maintained enough of their old identity while keeping their self-respect. Untouchability as a social practice must cease and in my view, even the priesthood as an occupation should be open to hindus of all communities who have the willingness to observe the corresponding practices (sattvic food, etc). I know casteists of all stripes have been fighting this, but I believe the battle to end untouchability is incomplete until this happens. As Yudhisthira says, a brahmin is determined by his conduct not birth.
Alas, poor Bliss. Wrapped up in the web of maya (a concept he will presumably claim was a contribution of christianity to hinduism), he cannot see how he spins further into oblivion. He attempts to pass off his defeat with pathetic, puerile smiley faces (the last resort of those in dialectical despair), not recognizing the fact that his own citation confirms that brahmins weren’t taking women from the king’s harem (as bliss claimed) but that the ritual maintained a symbolic offering of his wives and his land which were immediately returned as per the primary source itself.
He then arrogates the right to bypass the author’s translation saying there’s no need for the author to say symbolic even though later context demonstrates it and the story itself shows how all the queens continue to reside with Dasharatha. So great is bliss’ trauma, that he must stoop to such depths to preserve his prevarication, by not just arguing with me, but also the author’s translation of the primary source (which bliss has no expertise in).
In his consumption by hatred, he fails to recognize that he has been flatly disproven by his own source, states that because he provided a link to a wiki article, it’s the equivalent of providing the valmiki ramayana site simply because the latter is linked to as one of two dozen disparate sources. Flailing in desperation, he clasps onto odd assertions regarding brahmins and materialism, merely because they receive gifts meant to honor them.
He doesn’t even understand the Vedas, ignores how the upanishads are intricately linked to them, then brays how there is no liberation/moksha mentioned, even though the concepts are dealt with in the upanishads (which involve Vedanta, or the end and purpose of the Vedas). Worst of all, he fails to answer any questions regarding the pedophilia of the catholic church or bakrid, but insists on the right to interpret hindu sacrifices as he finds fit, though he has no expertise himself…Verily, falsehood must ever struggle in fear….we feel great sympathy for this poor, tormented soul…may he find some comfort to salve his pain….
we feel great sympathy for this poor, tormented soul…
You should pity yourself for being stupid enough to believe that a book filled with cruel animal and human sacrifices, with bestiality and necrophilia, with superstitious nonsense, with priestly scams etc could be the eternal truth revealed by God.
Alas, poor bliss. Having been completely demolished, realizing how much of a fool he appears for having lied about a link and attempting to contradict a translator when he has no expertise himself, continues to bray about non-existent bestiality and necrophilia but appears to have no problem whatsoever with catholic pedophilia, and thus, using his standard of interpretation, likely advocates it himself.
This unfortunate creature continues to foam at the mouth with yet another hate-filled, fact free rant. To him, hindus and the vedas and brahmins are the enemy and must be slandered at any cost, even his own dignity…RIP oh blissless one…
This is what Kausalya, the mother of the hindu godman Rama, had to go through in the vedic horse sacrifice performed by his father Dasharatha:
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=140977
Alas poor bliss he saw not how very desperate his post seemed
He now has sunk to discussion forums to contradict a primary source’s translation
His main contention has been destroyed and his lies about brahmins and harems unmasked
But yet he proceeds to maintain a brave face, hoping, praying, believing against all probability
that some shred of dignity he could, maintain, and preserve
but alas poor bliss, this was lost long ago when he ignored confirmed pedophilia for imagined necrophilia
and now mr. bestiality has lost all sign of smiley faces, oh what shall he do
may the good Lord find mercy upon him, and grant him the bliss in heaven he so sorely lacked on earth…
So all you can do now is spew juvenile gibberish. An immature, indirect acknowledgement of defeat. Grow up already.
If you really were interested in Truth you would have realized by now that the Vedas is NOT it. You are clearly very heavily invested in perpetuating the brahminical scam instead.
I predict that the more the sudras and dalits get educated the more the deceitful brahmin minority will become marginalized, and the better off India will be.
Alas poor bliss, he frothed in frustration, pathetically claiming victory when his defeat was accomplished a long, long ago
His hatred for hinduism impels him to badmouth that which he has no capability to understand–and gone are the (forced) smiley faces of yore
Let us drink to his memory in bliss…