i believe caste is a useful and good tool. this conclusion i have come to after considerable analysis of the data available.
casteism, on the other hand, is morally reprehensible, and is the same as 'secularism' in india: discrimination based on some un-objective criterion. casteism discriminates against some castes, 'secularism' discriminates against hindus. both completely wrong and immoral.
i too used to think that caste was bad. no, it is a reasonable organizing principle of society. the problems began with the british who built up a) the manusmrti, b) the caste system as founding principles of hindu society. neither is. caste is merely a recognition of fact that there are micro-organizations that social humans prefer to belong to. caste exists quite powerfully in every human society, especially in christist and mohammedan societies, except they dont call it caste.
caste has been useful in making hinduism a distributed system, thus more robust in the face of external invasions, unlike the centralized buddhist system, easily overthrown by mohdans.
this is the reason christists attack caste, because atomized, un-organized hindus are easier to convert. dramatic instance in kerala: OBC ezhava/thiyyas were attracted in large numbers to christist institutions in the years between 1819 and the time of the creation of the SNDP yogam. in fact, so much so that the vast majority of christists in kerala are ezhava converts. but one the SNDP yogam, in effect (although not in intent) an ezhava organization, was formed, ezhava conversion has slowed to a trickle, as caste feeling and pride and support has reduced the charms of the blandishments dangled in their faces by missionaries.
the fact of the matter is that most hindus would not convert under normal circumstances, given that they can see that christism is fundamentally deficient, illogical, and absurd. (i have that 'absurd' on authority of early church bigwg tertullian who said,
Natus est Dei Filius; non pudet, quia pudendum est: et mortuus est Dei Filius; prorsus credible est, quia ineptum est: et sepultus resurrexit; certum est, quia impossibile
(Translation: "The Son of God was born: there is no shame, because it is shameful. And the Son of God died: it is wholly credible, because it is innappropriate. And, buried, He rose again: it is certain, because impossible")
conversion comes when people are sick, poor, starving, or otherwise vulnerable.here is an example of how caste members sticking together has helped them:
http://newsinsight.net/columns/full_column22.htm
10 comments:
I agree with you, Rajeev, though I
have not fully read the article you
attached.
I have thought through this for
some years. I never understood
why people from other castes
demanded that Brahmins should give
up their caste and become
casteless.
Instead, the other castes could
have empowered themselves to become
stronger as groups. I always felt
that the well-off in any caste
should help the not so well-off in
their own caste. Even among
brahmins there are a lot of poor
people without enough resources for
higher education and all that.
I'm not saying I am against general
non-denominational charity. I
have participated in that also.
Many have called brahmins the root
of all caste-ism in India. I dont
think this is so. Carrying on the
culture and traditions of your own
caste is a good thing - it is not
wrong in any way. This is how
heritage is passed on from
generation to generation and lives
on. Also, birds of a feather
naturally flock together, and
groupism (sangat) is a most natural
and also indispensable thing for
humans. Why else do sangams and
clubs and alumni associations etc
exist ? We all need identitites.
Besides, most brahmins have
traditionally been very very
strict vegeterians, and this was
an added factor for their rigidity
of caste.
I think all castes should be proud
of whatever caste they are. It
takes all kinds of groups to make
a society.
If an individual decides he doesnt
care for caste, that is wholly up
to him. I do have a handful of
relatives who no longer wear their
sacred thread. They tell me they do
feel the need for any special
identity.
On the other hand, I (as a brahmin,
which may be obvious by now), have
continued to keep up my family's
traditional knowledge of vedas,
sanskrit and so on, and I consider
it worth keeping up, and something
I find interesting also.
Differences should be celebrated
and honored, and kept up with
pride, and not forcefully
eliminated.
If they go away naturally over
time, that is a different thing.
Nature cannot be stopped from
taking her course.
Just sharing my thoughts on this
important subject of caste and the
future of caste in India.
-
However, I did not understand what was meant by
"and why reservations dont matter to an extent" in the title of your post.
Dont matter to whom ? this is a big raging thing now. it obviously matters to many people.
Could you clarify ?
thanks...
-
hey averageindian!
re:
"Now, not only are the rural Hindus upset with the Brahmins and the Vysyas (at least the latter contribute economically),"
--- exactly what are you
insinuating ?!
the above amounts to saying
that brahmins do/did nothing
useful and just feed off other
castes! i dont think this was
the case!
though the brahmin community
never was particularly wealthy
overall. the respect they got
for a long time was totally for
other reasons.
re:
"The anti-brahminism plank with which Dravidianism was able to thrive was more only based on this feeling of let-down by the "non-Brahmin" folks"
--- and if brahmins didnt have
much wealth anyway, and if
wealth was the most important
thing worth having, what was
the real reason for the
anti-brahminism ?
wasnt it just a smoke-screen
for something else ? greed for
power perhaps...?
-
well averageindian,
you have clearly said in ref. to
brahmins and kshatriyas - "at least
the latter contributed economically"....
which means you are implying that
brahmins made no economic
contributions to society.
this is what sounds nonsensical
to me. so many brahmins worked for
a living in various services. i
know what the people in my family
were doing in TN a few generations
back. not everyone was a priest.
let's leave aside the famous ones,
men of letters, poets, etc.
we are talking of the average
person. the "averagebrahmin" :-).
so your statement is really
far removed from the truth.
brahmins also did contribute
economically. it wasnt only vyshyas
who made economic contributions,
though they were mostly engaged in
shop-keeping, business.
-
great stuff, averageindian! i appreciate this. i too didnt know about any deals between that malik kafur and tamil kings. your insights are appreciated. it's time to bury this nonsense about caste being some great terrible thing.
what are the top five myths you guys can see about caste? i'd like to write demolishing them.
KapiDhwaja:
Whether a person is aggressive or not is all there in the mind of that person. Not in the food you eat.
Agreed, but you are trying to relate absolute aggressiveness with vegetarianism. IMO, the more correct approach would be to check for change in aggressiveness wrt vegetarianism. A meat eating person might not be aggressive, but thats his default nature. By eating meat, he might become more aggressive, but the change wouldnt be significant, so the person would still be calm. Try to get an aggressive person to switch over to vegetarianism, and check if he is any less aggressive. This is the correct measure of aggressiveness - change as opposed to absolute. Hope this makes sense.
5 myths:
1. Aryans brought in the caste system into an essentially egalitarian (Dravidian) society.
2. Brahmins created the caste system.
3. Brahmins benefitted the most from the caste system.
4. Other castes were denied education and only Brahmins and some high castes got education.
5. Caste-based reservation is the right step towards a socially just nation.
another big myth is that brahmins
got education by depriving others.
the truth about highly educated
brahmins is, if you look into
their families' past, you will
invariably find a lot of struggle
against poverty, sincere hard work,
and toil, to come up. 2 generations
back, many of today's "well-off"
brahmin families would have not
enough to eat/wear, there were
joint families, people supported
each other in different ways. some
were lucky to find support from
community eating places. this is
how they came up - through struggle
and toil.
all this is consistent with the
fact that they never really
had wealth in the distant past.
they led lives of austerity and
simplicity. they were respected
for their vedic knowledge and
wisdom, and for being the keepers
of this knowledge. when the
patronage of kings and society in
general ceased, they had to come
up only through their own toil.
they passed on the benefits to
their children.
the community does seem to be
generally very intelligent, but
then there are highly intelligent
people in other castes too.
-
There has to be some organizing structure for every society. There are families in Britain that send boys to army. Likewise, business skills must have something to do with inheritance.
In simple terms, having something like 'caste' is the best way to exploit genetics, and the principle of natural selection. One peson from a non-business family might succeed..but if you compare 100 businessmen from business families to other 100 from non-business families, the difference will be self-evident. Same will hold for other activities that require special skills..
Mind you, family support is essential in most critical pursuits. A businessman can become bankrupt; militaryman's family has to withstand tremendous pressue; and a scholar's family has to shun many ordinary pleasures just so that he can study peacefully.
I am afraid to say 'caste is good', but I am quite certain that sowing caste-based seeds of hatred is the fastest way to destroy Indian society. The fundamentalists from other religions have reckoned as much. Unfortunately, there isn't a single Indian politician who has a vision about this..(BSP's Kanshiram did have a vision... He was clear that reservations were meningless once BC's got the power. He used to say that clearly).
Kum, by writing comments like the ones you have written above, you are falling into congress trap. The British, the Congress, and most anyone who is against India have realised the potential of caste as a tool in their game. Please do not air such one-sided thoughts. As I see it, Hindus of all castes have a contribution to make if India has to move on. Caste-based reservations is an issue that has been taken over by politicians, so it is best not to fan the fire there at the moment.
The most important thing is to raise awareness about the Congress game plan. That is th eneed of the hour.
Post a Comment