An Untouchable Apology

satya11, Thanks and wish you and fellow chowkies and chowk staff the same!

Ref swarrier #203

[MS Subbulakshmi and M L Vasanthakumari were Isai Vellalars, not Brahmins.]

Oh puhleeeeze! Isai Vellalar is a designation used by Doctor Artist Leader the Fund of Compassion to hide the fact that he is a descendant of devadasis....as were MS Subbulakshmi and M L Vasanthakumari. But MS and MLV had talents that were nurtured by the brahmins and in fact both married brahmins and were fully accepted as brahmins. Whereas Muthuvel Karunanidhi (why is he using his ``Father`` Muthuvel`s name instead of his mother Anjugam`s name as his initial as he really should since the ``Father``, in the absence of DNA tests, is unidentifiable?) will forever be treated as the low-caste f@%*er that he is.

[By the way I`m looking for a new copy of the Madras Quartet by Indira Menon. Is it still available in India or is it out of print?]

I checked the bookatore at the Madras Music Academy and the book is still available. Send me your address and I will mail you a copy. My e-mail is: harimau1947@hotmail.com.

Hi Chowkies,

Wish you all a very happy new year -2007.

Re: # 256
We both seem to agree that, through affirmative actions or otherwise, lower castes would be moving upward economically and socially.

I also agree to the points you make in last para of your post.

According to you, this would eventually lead to persons castes becoming irrelevant.

My point is caste system is the root cause of this entire problem. And we should focus on getting rid of it. By affirmative actions or any other social arrangements by any groups, we will be successful in breaking the castes barrier to a certain extent only, but this by itself will not make castes irrelevant.

You say, getting rid of castes system is unrealistic and we will have to wait an eternity.

I say, this is very difficult to achieve and will take time, but is not unrealistic. I am optimist, I already see many people rejecting castes.

The Swamiji incident, was to give an example of how, economically successful does not always guarantee social acceptability, and reinforces my view that caste system should go away. I narrated the incident as it is. And I would not comment on what family could have done and what not, as there are many other factors unknown to me.

Re:satya11#246

[..They have learnt their lesson. Now they will never invite a Swamiji, nor do they go to any ‘satsangs’. This happened in a big city and a decent locality....]

Satya, if you want upper caste hindus to forget about caste and accept lower caste people as their social equals, you will have to wait an eternity. People`s identity is defined by their caste in India, in spite of all the protestations to the contrary. This is true not just for hindus but even for muslims and christians. Just look at how HD was talking about his wife worrying about N and N+Delta caste!!

Here is what this family could have done. It could have designated someone within their own caste as a ``Swamiji``, brought him over and conducted huge satsangs. They they could have made some charity contributions to forward castes as an act of socially accepting the forward castes!!

My point is very simple. Castes will never go away on their own. However, the constitution of India coupled with demographics, provides lower caste people with the opportunity to get their act together. That means they can take over political and economic power and improve their lot through education, employment and enterprise (via affirmative action or otherwise). Then they should form their own alternative social arrangements. Forward caste people have no choice but to accept this situation and cooperate or become irrelevant. When Laloo Prasad Yadav exercises his commands, brahmin officers in the railway jump up and down and listen to him, right? If you wait for brahmins to respect Laloo Prasad Yadav out of kindness of their hearts, forget it. In other words, you want social acceptability? Go and grab it, my friend. Get education, get money, get power, kick some forward caste a$$ (figuratively of course!!) and get them to respect you. You will see how easily the equation can change.

Re:HD#243

[...Ok, ranjit, start shooting :).....]

HD, if you claim that a crow is white, there is not much left to shoot at. :-)

As per your theory, Saudis, Egyptians, Iraqis and South Indians are the same people. That means South Indians are semitic people!! What can I say to such a claim?

Also you claim that aryan mixture occured gradually without conquest, yet somehow we have this varna based caste system that morphed into occupation based caste system. If it was evolutionary as you guys are claiming, can you explain how it was universally applied in the same manner all over India? Desis can hardly agree on anything from Punjab to Tamil Nadu, but somehow without any central government or bureacracy, people all over India spontaneously adoped the same, identical caste structure, such that we have brahmins in Kashmir, Tamil Nadu or Bengal!! Must have been the one and only time in our history that all the millions of people in India got the same identical dream at night!!

Anyway, lets just agree that we are all descended from Africans and leave it at that!! :-)

harimau, I wasn`t generalising off course.

There are good people and also megalomaniacs and nuts of various hues in all castes and religions.

You might possibly be mistaken if you think today people respect you for the sole reason of being a brahmin.
Maybe 50 years ago, but not today.

They probably respect you for your skills, your wealth and your acheivements, which you mistake for `caste respect`.

Ref HD #249

[The brahmin will eagerly tell the white foreigner how he/she is `so superior` back home. The white man will smile indulgently, all the while thinking `what imbeciles`.
And the brahmin is so happy with that smile!]

A true brahmin does not do that. Like me, he will treat the entire world as beneath him.

It is surprising what that does. People from every walk of life recognize me for the brahmin that I am, be it a fortune-teller with a parakeet on the beach at Chennai, a hotel owner in Karaikkal, a fellow customer at a restaurant in Pondicherry or a hotel manager in Chidambaram (all recent incidents). Even when I travel in North India where I don`t speak a word of Hindi.

Brahmins have no inferiority complex with regard to white men. They are all `mlechhas` to us, lower than the People of the Fifth Varna. And about the same level as Muslims and Christians and people of other Faiths.

HD,

Funny, tragic, and true...Hope we will leave our children wiser than our parents left us in this regard.

kaalchakra, if you`ve lived in India you must know.

Its not only caste-A oppressing caste-Z, or caste-M over caste-N.
It goes to fine levels. caste-N and caste-N+delta

My dear wife complains that Mrs L. is always ordering her around at get-togathers.
She feels its because Mrs L.s caste is a small delta over her caste.
I tried telling her its probably because Mrs L. is a bit bossy by nature and you`re submissive.
But no avail. She feels in her bones, its the delta.

Then sometime ago my wife was looking (surfing) for a suitable groom for a relative of hers. She came across an adv. from a family we know, who`re a small delta below, caste wise.
In the adv, they had specified the same caste as her.
This shocked and offended her greatly, much to my consternation.

Needless to say, this kept me amused for a few days :)

HD

Yaar, HD, I truly don`t believe that happens, but does it? I mean, have you yourself seen this shyt occur? (It very well may: Satya`s anecdotes are appalingly real. So one wouldn`t put any kind of foolishness past us).

satya11,

Yes, how many hundred thousand times has this kind of incident been repeated all over our poor country.

We have become a joke among other nations, yet how proud we are of our casteism!

The brahmin will eagerly tell the white foreigner how he/she is `so superior` back home.
The white man will smile indulgently, all the while thinking `what imbeciles`.
And the brahmin is so happy with that smile!

Re: # 247

And Sir, they preach love, compassion equality at these satsangs.

Satya

``a powerful forward castes group conveyed to him that they cannot come for ‘Satsangs’ in the their house.``

Dammit...this kind of stupidity one saw twenty years ago in our village. That happening in a city in this day and age is extremely depressing...:(:(

Re: # 242
When discussing about caste issues, too much emphasis is placed on reservation then on social acceptability.

Our leaders are focusing more on affirmative action, instead on focusing on correcting the religion itself. Caste System is the root cause of problem.

Affirmative action will not solve caste problem, even if it continued for another 200yrs.
I don’t think all caste will ever become equal. I don’t think there will be a time when every section of society gets equal opportunity and therefore person’s caste would not matter. The only way we can have equality is to get the castes out of Hinduism. This should be our main focus. I predict a very dangerous outcome of current caste based politics, if it continued without any improvement in social acceptability within castes.

When a low castes converts to Christianity or Islam, it is not like he is landed with some great job, but because his is been given a promise of social acceptability. Christian missionary have got this right, where as our Hindu leadership do not seem to understand this, sadly even after so many years.

Reservation does not play any role in tainting low castes. It is the casteist attitude.

Even if a low caste group were to become economically successful without the help of reservation, castiest attitude do not change.

A hard working family of low castes, I know off, have become rich because of growth in their business. None of their family members are beneficiary of affirmative actions. They are not highly educated people, and are content with running their business.
5yrs back they had invited a popular Swamiji from our city for ‘Satsangs & Ram-naams’ (Religious gathering for prayers). The Swamiji was suppose to stay for 3 days in their house. He was given lots of gifts & dakshina, and was treated very well. After staying for a day, the Swamiji left, saying that a powerful forward castes group conveyed to him that they cannot come for ‘Satsangs’ in the their house and therefore, do not want Swamiji to stay in their house. It was a big time humiliation for this family. They have learnt their lesson. Now they will never invite a Swamiji, nor do they go to any ‘satsangs’. This happened in a big city and a decent locality.

Questions for those people who support castes system in Hinduism –

1) What is benefit of caste system?
2) With caste system in place, how can we achieve equality among people?
3) Who decides who belongs to which castes?
4) What problems do you see if Hinduism is caste free?

Re: # 243

Good points... especially the one on daitya and aditya...

#ranjit,
>>Now Sri Aurobindo is not exactly a racist or a flaming casteist, right?

No, but he sure was a terrible bore :)

Read his `Integral Yoga`.
A point that can be simply expressed in 5 words, he propounds in humongous english words for a whole paragraph.

ranjit,

About asura/devta, mythology says they are cousins.
Diti and Aditi were sisters.
Demons were born to Diti. so theyre called Daitya.
Gods were born to Diti, so theyre called Aditya.

By any stretch of imagination we can`t think of a conquering/enslaving race refering to their slaves, of another race, as `cousins`!!

About Gods being white and demons being black, I don`t recall any such thing in my readings. Off course, AmarChitraKatha is primarily responsible for these notions among the young generation :)

But with occasional mistakes...
Demons in general are shown black, but if you had a chance to read the ACK - Prahlad, you`ll see he`s shown as a white kid. How come? Prahlad was a daitya.

Same for Kacha-Devyani.
Devyani, a daitya, is shown as a white beauty??

So I think your theory of Demons being black is incorrect.
But I`ll stand corrected if you can provide solid evidence to the contrary.

---

Here`s a small list of points against the aryan invasion theory.

1. In the hindu texts there is no mention of any separate homeland of the aryans, other than India. (very important point)

2. No mention of any invasion/conquest/enslavement.

3. Mixed color (black/white/brown) for Gods, Sages, warrriors and holy men.

I remember there are more points, but too lazy to google :)

---

About the iraqi peoples looks, you missed the point.

a)You say the current Indian looks are a mix of black aborgines and white invaders.
b)The Iraqis look like us Indians (virtually indistinguisable).
what can we conclude from this?

---

Imho, here`s a more plausible theory (its not mine).

(1)
Yes, there was mixing, but it was the other way.
The dark race was superior technologically to the whites, who very gradually moved in from the north.

This explains - the stunning achievemnts of the pyramids and mohenjodaro.
Such incredible mathematical, engineering, astronomical skill points to a very advanced civilization.
No one will say that egyptians, living near the equator, were a white race.

(2)
This mixing did not start hapenning in India, but in babylonia (iraq) - closest to central asia.
The original superior dark race occupied a vast area, from Egypt, Iraq to India (mohenjodaro, etc).

This explains - why Indian looks are found all over egypt, arabia, iran.
(But remember Egypt and Iran, both suffered a significant gene pool change with Greek/Roman conquest).

There are stunning similarities between babylonian and indian astronomical systems.
No simple ways to explain it have been found.
eg. dividing circle into 360 degrees.
1 degree = 60 minutes, 1 minute = 60 seconds.

(3)
The races that eventually populated north India completely were mixed color.
This was before the caste system set in.

This explains - why Gods/Sages/warriors are of all colors. No stigma attached to black skin.

(4)
The `gradual white impurity` did not reach far south.
(Westcoastal area (kerala for eg) is an exception, there is significant white component there due to heavy maritime trade with arabs and europeans for several millenia).

This explains - why southern dark race is fairly `pure`.

---

What is the manu-smriti but a `Gene Filter`.
Upper castes are allowed to marry lower caste women, but lower caste men are not granted an equivalent privilege.

Two results are guaranteed with this arrangement.
Upper caste gene pool will `improve` over time.
Lower caste gene pool will `degrade` over time.

This explains the current situation in India.

Ok, ranjit, start shooting :)

You cannot do too much for low castes. They have to realize the importance of education. Only reservation is not the answer. Also converting to Buddhism or Christianity or Islam is not answer. Without ``real`` hard work of education and quality work you cannot bring about change in people`s attitude to them. Reservation taints them. People will say that so-and-so is employed in a position because of quota and that he/she really has no talent for that position. The religion change completes (what has not been accomplished fully by the mainstream Hinduism), the process of their alienation.

Re: #238 by ranjit

Thanks for the link.

I neither agree nor disagree with rest of your post.

#237 by kaalchakra
[Today, no re-interpretive wild goose hunt is needed to establish the complete untenability of its original religious justification, and that disconnect with basic Indian thought also remains the caste system`s final undoing.]

Very true sir.

I mean - the invasion must be a big deal for the aryans... and that should have been mentioned somewhere... and/or carried down by oral history... a lot of stuff was carried down by oral history...

Re: # 238

But do vedas [or any other text] explicitly mention a conquest/invasion/migration?... I don`t think so... all we have anecdotal stuff most of which can be explained both ways...

Re:satya11#236

[..I could not find a relationship with the word Aryan...]

There are numerous references, even on the net to the word Anari and its meaning of being un-Aryan. The word `ari` itself is a colloquial form of arya. Just check out Sri Aurobindo`s lecture here -

http://intyoga.online.fr/signif.htm

Now Sri Aurobindo is not exactly a racist or a flaming casteist, right?

[..How come Ram/Krishna and some other Gods of ancient India are dark skinned, and not mixed color ?...]

There are two possible explanations. One is that interrmarriage would produce an occasional dark skinned person among aryans, and they might have done heroic things in order to be elevated a Godly status. The second explanation is that when Vedic hindus conquered the non-aryans, they co-opted some of the non-aryan Gods in their pantheon in order to win over the hearts and minds of the conquered. Most conquering religions tend to do that in order to win over the locals (e.g. Christianity with Pagans in Europe)

[..I tend to agree more with HD`s explanation, and not convinced with Aryan invasion and devta/asura theory...]

So how do you explain the aryan continuum stretching from Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and into India? Swarrier has actually given a genetic composition evidence for racial mixing. But even from language (Sanskrit and its Indo-european links), religious traditions and historical basis, it is undeniable that India was settled by Aryans.

Remember that the subcontinent was not very populated in those times, so the Aryans could have found vast spaces that were uninhabitated. There are accounts of Aryan glee and happiness at finding the fertile Indo-Gangetic plains that were relatively unpopulated, which they called ``Vaikunth``. So the conflict and subjugation of non-aryans may have been relatively easy.

Ever so often one runs into truthful believers trying to convert us innocent heathens. Their opening line almost always is: ``Do you believe in God?`` Then they quickly follow that up with: ```Then you must believe in some version of God lives in a big cheese house, operates a terrific candy store, and advertises through only such and such.``

Where Aryans originated is a separate question. Its answer, whatever it may be, canNOT support the following two arguments:

1. Caste = race; and Casteism = racism
2. Aryan migration to India was/is exactly same as every other immigration in our history.

Casteism is a multifaceted phenomenon. It is also extremely dynamic - as what has unfolded in just the last 60 years should make clear.

Caste was essentially about organic specialization of society. It became about control (and control alone) when it was perpetuated through birth. To make that control iron-clad, justification was manufactured through the Karma theory - a distincitive doctrine that lies at the core almost all Indian thought (barring some relatively small traditions).

This religious manufacturing of control was a ``masterstroke`` in social engineering. Today, no re-interpretive wild goose hunt is needed to establish the complete untenability of its original religious justification, and that disconnect with basic Indian thought also remains the caste system`s final undoing.

#232 ranjit
[HD sahib, have you heard the hindi word ``Anari``? Anari refers to a simpleton or a rustic fool.
It literally means non-Aryan. So it is basically an ancient racial slur.]

Anari = An+Ari, Ari (In hindi)= Saw (In English) or sharp, so Anari = blunt, or stupid.

I looked up for the word `Ari` and prefix `An` here -
http://webapps.uni-koeln.de/tamil/

Closest Sanskrit meaning of `Ari`, to current discussion is, `to flow`, so Anari would mean `blocked`.
I could not find a relationship with the word Aryan.

#232 ranjit

[ In spite of all the best efforts, intermarriages would have continued, creating dark skinned Ramas and Krishnas along the way.]

[Still, you do see that muslims on the average do tend to be fairer and taller, which is a proof of the influence of that central asian blood, albeit it has been diluted signficantly.]

How come Ram/Krishna and some other Gods of ancient India are dark skinned, and not mixed color ?

Could it be that dark/fair colors of Ram/Krishna , devatas/asura were given much later,
after influence and migration of people from the west.

It could also be the influence of art of that time.

All ancient temples have black granite statues (as in south indian temples).
Where as newer temples have marble/non black, statues, which is mostly likely an influence from west..

So ancient hindu would say `praise to the beautiful black Rama`, later day hindu would say `praise to the beautiful fair Rama`

I tend to agree more with HD`s explanation, and not convinced with Aryan invasion and devta/asura theory.

Ranjit
You tend to oversimplify things. Being semitic is not a racial characteristic. It is more a term used to group cultures. Shem was one of the three sons of Noah.

Genetically the Indian racial makeup is different from an ordinary black/white one. It is a co-mingling of Central Asian, Middle Eastern, Mongoloid and Negroid/Aboriginal genes. It is also widely acknowledged that the Y chromosomes of most of the upper casts are closer to a European Y chromosome than an Asian one.

What is interesting is that the greater genetic material is closer to the Asian than the European but as the castes move up the social ladder the reverse is true. Another interesting finding has been that all Indian races are based on Asian genetic material rather than African except in the case of recent African migrants to India like the Siddi or the slaves brought by the Portuguese to India.

This does not of course basically dis-agree with the racial underpinings of the caste system. But it is not that clear cut either as you would never find a dark God being worshipped by other pure racial societies.

As for the An-ari term remember linguistic usage can consist of loan words so just one example does not prove a point. One can argue that it was an insulting term amongst Aryans only and proceeded as a loan word into other languages.

Ranjit bhai,

I would recommend Jared Diamond`s ``Guns, Germs and Steel`` to you. It gives some interesting insights into anthropology and why certain races go ahead and why others fall behind. One of the interesting obs the book makes is that in any society the elite is always the fairer lot, reason being that they are exempt from manual labour and don`t get suntanned.

(Sirjee, Indian mythology and scriptures are full of stories about devatas fighting the asuras. Typically the devatas are fair skinned and good looking while the asuras are dark skinned and ugly.)

Right. But as time passed things got rather complicated. Gradually the so-called elite co-opted the Gods of the locals- dark skinned Shiv and Parvati of the original dark skinned ``Dravidian`` inhabitants and also Ram and Krishna, again represented in dark skin, possibly from local tribesmen. And it is noteworthy that the fairest Hindus, the Kashmiri Pandit`s leading God is Lord Shiva, the dark skinned God of the Dravidians.

(The Iranian Shah used to have the title of ``Ruler of all Aryans``. Afghanistan used to call their country Arianna or land of Aryans. In fact, their airlines is still called Arianna airlines. )

If I am not mistaken even Ireland and Armenia have their origin in the population being Aryan.

Regards

Re: # 232

Ranjit,

---

In all such racial mixtures, the outcome is amazingly close to our good old desi looks. This is yet another evidence supporting racial mixing in India.

---

Great insight. That`s true indeed.

Re:HD#231

[..So ranjit, I find it difficult to think of a white conquering race oppressing/enslaving a black inferior race, in the Indian context.
Surely there must be some negative remark about dark aborigines in the Indian texts. There are none, afaik.....]

Sirjee, Indian mythology and scriptures are full of stories about devatas fighting the asuras. Typically the devatas are fair skinned and good looking while the asuras are dark skinned and ugly. The devatas are always righteous and live in heaven, while the asuras are evil and live in paatal (although, even the asuras have their gurus). Doesnt this mirror very closely to the rhetoric employed by racists all over the world? How do you think such one sided racially blatant mythology came about if everyone was a brown skinned desi for millenia?

HD sahib, have you heard the hindi word ``Anari``? Anari refers to a simpleton or a rustic fool. It literally means non-Aryan. So it is basically an ancient racial slur.

Remember you are talking about an ancient time, where there were hardly any historical writings and most historical memories were passed by word of mouth and mythologies. Of course as time passed, and the racial intermixing did produce the typical ``desi`` looks i.e. mix of aryans and non-aryans, we see more stories about desis fighting desis starting with the Mahabharat.

Finally just analyze the desi racial makeup. In every society in the world, where whites and blacks or whites and natives have intermarried, the half-breeds end up looking very similar to desis. In South Africa, there was a ``colored`` class which was the progeny of whites and blacks who had intermarried. The same is true in South America when Europeans intermarried with the natives or blacks to produce ``mulattos``. In all such racial mixtures, the outcome is amazingly close to our good old desi looks. This is yet another evidence supporting racial mixing in India.

[...However, anyone notice the iraqis on TV.
No one will give them a second look in any Indian city.

They look like perfectly ordinary north Indians.
ranjit, how do you explain that? ]

Arrey bhai, where does Iraq come into the picture? Iraqis are all arabs who are semitic in race. They are not aryans. God knows how or where the semitic race originated.

Aryans came in from Central Asia/Europe/Russia and they settled in Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and of course, India. You can see that the Iranians, Afghans and Turks have very distinct aryan looks in terms of height, sharp features, fair skin etc. The Iranian Shah used to have the title of ``Ruler of all Aryans``. Afghanistan used to call their country Arianna or land of Aryans. In fact, their airlines is still called Arianna airlines. Ancient India was itself referred to as Aryavarta. So need I prove anything else? :-)

swarrier,
>>Viewing the development of any society, the caste system would have definitely arisen >>from occupations and then eventually become stratified >>to protect the interests of >>those in power. And the ones in power would have been the most astute, most powerful >>and most unscrupulous. Once >>all that is in place it is very easy to re-write or create >>religious myths on the superiority of one class over another.

No doubt. I recall couple decades ago, during the apartheid regime in SA, I came across a report that the christian Bible there was changed, to approve of their apartheid practices. Doing a manu-smriti of sorts. Certainly the shadow of corruption can never be far from any human construct/endeavor.
However I think that situation is different. There, in SA, both a technologically and racially superior race was oppressing the other.

In the Indian context, in my readings of various ancient Indian books, I never once encountered a negative connotation to dark skin.

So ranjit, I find it difficult to think of a white conquering race oppressing/enslaving a black inferior race, in the Indian context.
Surely there must be some negative remark about dark aborigines in the Indian texts. There are none, afaik.

---

swarrier,
>>The caste system is not uncommon to any of the Indo-European peoples. However the >>Indian subcontinent is the only place where there has been an attempt to provide >>religious justification.

Yes, and we`re scratching our heads to find how/why this hapenned :)
No easy explanation fits.

---

While talking of aryan peoples, we seem to think anyone west of the hindu kush would fit the profile. Tall, fair skinned and sharp featured.

However, anyone notice the iraqis on TV.
No one will give them a second look in any Indian city.

They look like perfectly ordinary north Indians.
ranjit, how do you explain that?
Was there a reverse migration of black aborigines westward, per your mixing theory :)

Ref soyaf@%*ingsauce #224

[Here`s something very relevant:
``Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh says his government must do more to combat discrimination against lower castes and minorities.
He told an international conference in Delhi the steps were necessary for the disadvantaged to benefit from the country`s economic growth. ``]

Can you explain why it is necessary to provide reservations for Muslims who raped, plundered, pillaged and took into slavery millions of Hindus while at the same time punishinh the upper castes for their supposed suppression of the Dalits?

We are willing to wait until you take the Muslim dick out of your mouth to answer the question.

And the idiot author, would he demand an apology from Muslims?

satya

Manthan is the right word, and vish and amrit metaphors fit the situation perfectly.

The most hopeful part was you emphasizing the collective nature of this effort. In their own different ways, different people can contribute, and we get little by making any of this about specific people or groups.

Re: # 227

Ch()ali,

if anybody else posted I wud have commented on the youtube video but a worshipper of cruel peadophile posted the video I wud give u a link that shud satisfy u in good measure as a quid pro quo.

Here u go & Njoy.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q1dsvCnwyjs

Is this practice limited to Brahmins? or can all castes enjoy the holy water?

Re: # 220

[The disadvantage against which we Hindus are working is that our traditional identification system acquired a ruthless hierarchical form, becoming UNFAIR to a lot of us]

I therefore, like some members on this board, advocate reforming Hinduism to get rid of casteism.

‘Hindu dharm ka jab manthan hoga (ya jo ho raha hai), Vish to sabhi peeyenge, Amrit bhi sabhi peeyenge

#218 many things.. culinary traditions, wedding-marriage traditions, places of pilgrimage (typically a caste tends to have a specific deity of choice) and so on. then there are oral histories (some real, some imaginary with masala, all very interesting). also how the castes consider each other lower in matrimony... khatris and panjabi jatts e.g.

Here`s something very relevant:
``Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh says his government must do more to combat discrimination against lower castes and minorities.
He told an international conference in Delhi the steps were necessary for the disadvantaged to benefit from the country`s economic growth. ``

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6212131.stm

Re: # 218

#218 by jang on December 28, 2006 8:11am PT
[satya i can apreciate the unease as shyte gets too personal..i make sure to discuss castes when we both are inebriated ;-) ]

Sure we can discuss castes, ‘Mil Baithenge 3 yaar – Hum, tum aur harimau :) ‘
But sir, I don’t drink, (Now you see, what I talking about precon.... :))

I think, I can have a decent debate with harimau when he is really drunk. If incase he does not agree with me, I can atleast beat him up and disappear.

I agree with rest of your post, 218.

Btw, what other things you like about castes besides it having fantastically fascinating
bio-diversity?

Ref urbashi #207

[...And can someone explain why Christian and Muslim converts demand the privileges of being Dalits if Christianity and Islam were really egalitarian?]

Because when pigs feed at the feeding trough, all pigs rush toward the trough. It is difficult to keep only some pigs away from the slop.

Ref satya11 #213

[I personally don’t like people asking about castes. I have noticed that people ......have preconceived notion about various castes...]

Well, if I run into you in a professional capacity and I come to know that you got your degree despite thinking 2 + 2 = 4 just because you are an OBC/MBC/BC/SC/ST, I do have a right to assign you to the category called ``Brain-Dead``.

The day you frikking cretins and monkey-imitators are willing to be evaluated on the same basis as everybody else, you can ask me to respect you. No, you wouldn`t have to ask me; you would have automatically earned it and most certainly receive it from me.

jang

It could be argued that historically the real `winners` in the caste system were powerful Kshatriyas and wealthy Vaishyas families (of course, they had to work for their blessings: power could be lost and money very easily move to other households).

satya

``in US my Hindu friends, almost always query about each others caste.``

That`s a disappointment, but not a total surprise. As you mentioned, there is a strong tendency to associate people to specific `traditional` characteristics. In that, caste does become a lot like biradari system - a point Ranjit (and Sadna earlier) highlighted. Caste serves the role of identiifcation (of self and others) of all kinds.

The disadvantage against which we Hindus are working is that our traditional identification system acquired a ruthless hierarchical form, becoming UNFAIR to a lot of us.

Some solution has to be found that begins to do away with that inherent unfairness.

Aryan entry into India is not a mythology. There cant be any video evidence but there are genetic, philological evidences. Moreover the 3-tier social system became 4-tiered in India.

If u trace the ancient history of Persia, they too had this 3-tier social system of professions i.e priests, warriors and cultivators/traders. We can trace the priest-warrior-trader tiers in Persians of India i.e Parsis. The castes of Parsis (since native Persians became Muslims and shed their castes in toto) reads like DASTUR, SHEHSHAH and XXXXX (I forgot the name).

Since they are all of same genetic make-up there`s no stigma to being a lower tier person.

Since the same 3-tier social system came to India (thru them???), they gave this 4th tier to the natives. Fourth tier was replaced by multiple tiers as 4th tier people started acting like Upper tier people. There`s an `economic` and `control` angle to this caste system.

satya i can apreciate the unease as shyte gets too personal..i make sure to discuss castes when we both are inebriated ;-)

i think the caste system remained because it also was an economic system in absence of explicit slavery which was widely practiced. there is always resistance to change in economic system. warrier mention of artisans of europe is interesting. in india the artisans were unlettered and brahmins were unskilled. lack of cross-pollination meant lack of letters as a tool for artisans. banias otoh were lettered and as a result maintained fairly sophisticated banking and book-keeping systems.

Re: # 215
Ranjit , this is a fairly simplified explanation. If we accept the Aryan migration theory which seems to be the most plausible, then we must also consider that these people were relatively uncivlilsed nomads compared to those who created the Indus valley civilisations. So chances are that the influences cut both ways and that is why Indian society is different from other areas.

I hardly think the Indian subcontinent would have been completely colonised by the original Aryan migrants. Even during the Gupta empires a large portion of Central India was still being made inhabitable by cutting down the forests.

The caste system is not uncommon to any of the Indo-European peoples. However the Indian subcontinent is the only place where there has been an attempt to provide religious justification.

Viewing the development of any society, the caste system would have definitely arisen from occupations and then eventually become stratified to protect the interests of those in power. And the ones in power would have been the most astute, most powerful and most unscrupulous. Once all that is in place it is very easy to re-write or create religious myths on the superiority of one class over another. I am sure at various times various groups of people who were wily enough got promoted to the upper castes to maintain equilibrium.


The term Varna being colour is also questioned. It seems to be closer to ``lustre`` than ``colour`` and there is a whole host of other meanings attributed to the word, including veil, arrangement etc.

Different interpretations at different times. -)

India definitely stagnated because unlike Europe where the burghers and the artisans took control of their affairs we adopted a laissez-faire attitude.

Ranjit bhai,

(Still, you do see that muslims on the average do tend to be fairer and taller)

That would be true for the upper caste Muslims (for instance I know of some Shias who claim to be of fairly recent Persian descent) but the vast majority of IMs belong to artisan/peasant classes (butchers, masons, tailors, weavers etc.) and are physically indistinguishable from other Indians.

Regards

Re:HD#211

[...Don`t mind if I try and poke a few holes here and there :)...]

Not at all. In fact, I would like to return the favor. :-)

[..The aryan invasion theory has been debunked left and right by people knowledgable in these topics....]

Puhleeze!! The only people who have debunked this theory are some die-hard RSS ideologues who cannot accept that India was colonized by people before the muslims showed up and claim that it was the early Indians who spread outwards from India!!

Through out written history, people from beyond the northwest have invaded and settled into India. It has been a well documented one way traffic, whether it was the Greeks, Sakas, Kushans, all kinds of assorted riff-raffs from Central Asia and of course, muslim invaders. There has been not one incident noted by anyone when any group of people from India (hindu or buddhist or muslim), willingly migrated from India permanently towards Afghanistan and Central Asia. They might have been taken as slaves by muslims creating the gypsies perhaps, but there is no known case of willing migration. After all it is rather silly to leave warm climates and fertile lands to go and settle in Afghanistan or Uzbekistan!!

The RSS historians would want us to believe that the Aryans were the exception to this 5000 year known pattern of human migration. Somehow, they were the only exception in history when large numbers of people originating from India migrated northward and westward to colonize Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asia. Given the ``adventurous`` levels of desi nature, no wonder that sounds like a bunch of crock.

[..Lower caste being militarily defeated people...]

Well, lets accept the premise that there was no military conquest. Assume that there was a time, say t=0, when there were 0 castes. At that time, anyone could have taken up any profession, since there were no castes. So someone could be a priest by choice or a sweeper by choice. Lets accept that it was all driven by merit and the less meritorious person became a sweeper. Fair enough!!

Now at t=1, some desi dude suddenly comes up with the brilliant notion of a hierarchical social structure that solidifies that differentiation between a priest and sweeper as caste, with no intermarriage and no mobility between the castes. Given that there was no military conquest at t=0, wouldnt every harimau, ranjit, mohar and satya11 of those days leave what they were doing and want to be a brahmin or kshatriya at the most? Why the hell would anyone accept any lower caste status by choice?

Continuing that timeline, at t=2, everyone in rest of India, notices what the desi dude came up with at t=1, and willingly applies it uniformly across the board all over India. That sounds really, really plausible, right?

Isnt it far more plausible that aryans came from Northwest, settled down and conquered or colonized entire subcontinent over time? There must have been intermarriages from day 1 with the original natives, which must have threatened aryan identity causing the genesis of the caste system as a varna system. In fact varna denotes color. In spite of all the best efforts, intermarriages would have continued, creating dark skinned Ramas and Krishnas along the way. It must have created the need for a religion based construct tied to professions (manusmriti) to keep the intermixing to become completely out of control.

The greatest proof of Aryan invasion and intermarriage is the analogous event of Muslim invasion and intermarriage. Muslim invasion in India occured over centuries. Significant numbers of Central Asians, Turks, Iraninans, Afghans, Mughals came in as soldiers or immigrants during muslim rule and settled in India to take advantage of the muslim rule. They intermarried with the locals who converted to Islam, which ultimately has made muslims to look pretty much like hindus. Can you now identify any pure Turk or Iranian among desi musims, even in Pakistan? Still, you do see that muslims on the average do tend to be fairer and taller, which is a proof of the influence of that central asian blood, albeit it has been diluted signficantly. Now granted that Aryan migration to India must have been in much vaster numbers than muslim migration, nevertheless muslim migration provides an interesting model to analyze.

Re: # 213

`Thanks, you reading my posts.` should read `Thanks for reading my posts.`

Re: # 206
#206 by jang

Thanks, you reading my posts.

[i always ask folks what their caste (as PC as possible) is and try to get their perceptions of others and themselves]

I personally don’t like people asking about castes. I have noticed that people (not you :) ) have preconceived notion about various castes, and they would immediately assign that the person. For example, if I am freely having discussions with Hindu friends, during which if they come to know that, I belong to the caste of say liquor sellers, there would suddenly be uneasiness in our discussion. Moreover, someone might knowingly/unknowingly make unpleasant comments.

I find that even in US my Hindu friends, almost always query about each others caste. This makes social interaction with these people difficult. I usually dodge any questions regarding my caste. For me, someone asking about my caste is not same as asking about say country, language, city or religion. I preferred to be known only as Indian and Hindu.

What Megasthenes the Greek (350BC-290BC) had to say about the castes:

The whole population of India is divided into seven castes, of which the first is formed by the collective body of the Philosophers, which in point of number is inferior to the other classes, but in point of dignity preeminent over all. For the philosophers, being exempted from all public duties, are neither the masters nor the servants of others. They are, however, engaged by private persons to offer the sacrifices due in lifetime, and to celebrate the obsequies of the dead: for they are believed to be most dear to the gods, and to be the most conversant with matters pertaining to Hades. In requital of such services they receive valuable gifts and privileges. To the people of India at large they also render great benefits, when, gathered together at the beginning of the year, they forewarn the assembled multitudes about droughts and. wet weather, and also about propitious winds, and diseases, and other topics capable of profiting-the hearers. Thus the people and the sovereign, learning beforehand what is to happen, always make adequate provision against a coming deficiency, and never fail to prepare beforehand what will help in a time of need. The philosopher who errs in his predictions incurs no other penalty than obloquy, and he then observes silence for the rest of his life.

The second caste consists of the Husbandmen, who appear to be far more numerous than the others. Being, moreover, exempted from fighting and other public services, they devote the whole of their time to tillage; nor would an enemy coming upon a husbandman at work on his land do him any harm, for men of this class, being regarded as public benefactors, are protected from all injury. The land, thus remaining unravaged, and producing heavy crops, supplies the inhabitants with all that is requisite to make life very enjoyable. The husbandmen themselves, with their wives and children, live in the country, and entirely avoid going into town. They pay a land-tribute to the king, because all India is the property of the crown, and no private person is permitted to own land. Besides the land-tribute, they pay into the royal treasury a fourth part of the produce of the soil.

The third caste consists of the Neatherds and Shepherds and in general of all herdsmen who neither settle in towns nor in villages, but live in tents. By hunting and trapping they clear the country of noxious birds and wild beasts. As they apply themselves eagerly and assiduously to this pursuit, they free India from the pests with which it abounds,--all sorts of wild beasts, and birds which devour the seeds sown by the husbandmen.

The fourth caste consists of the Artizans. Of these some are armourers, while others make the implements which husbandmen and others find useful in their different callings. This class is not only exempted from paying taxes, but even receives maintenance from the royal exchequer.

The fifth caste is the Military. It is well organized and equipped for war, holds the second place in point of numbers, and gives itself up to idleness and amusement in the times of peace. The entire force--men-at-arms, war-horses, war-elephants, and all--are maintained at the king`s expense.

The sixth caste consists of the Overseers. It is their province to inquire into and superintend all that goes on in India, and make report to the king, or, where there is not a king, to the magistrates.

The seventh caste consists of the Councillors and Assessors,--of those who deliberate on public affairs. It is the smallest class, looking to number, but the most respected, on account of the high character and wisdom of its members; for from their ranks the advisers of the king are taken, and the treasurers, of the state, and the arbiters who settle disputes. The generals of the army also, and the chief magistrates, usually belong to this class.

Such, then, are about the parts into which the body politic in India is divided. No one is allowed to marry out of his own caste, or to exercise any calling or art except his own: for instance, a soldier cannot become a husbandman, or an artizan a philosopher.

---

Philosophers are obviously the `Brahmins`.
Are Husbandmen the `Shudras`? and where is the business class - the vaisya (bania)?

`..speculate on how the caste-system might have begun`
#176
ranjit, good attempt my man!

Don`t mind if I try and poke a few holes here and there :)

`Aryan invasion`

The aryan invasion theory has been debunked left and right by people knowledgable in these topics. The theory was apparently propounded by europeans (English, German) in an attempt to promote `common ancestry` feelings with the enslaved and troublesome Indians, especially after the 1857 mutiny.

And yet, there might be a germ of truth somewhere in there.
After all, we do see among the general population, appreciably darker skin and less sharp features in TamilNadu and parts of AP, etc. Are they defeated people who fled south?
Why is brahui (spoken in baluchistan, Iran and Afghanistan) a dravidian language?

I hope you get a chance to read Spencer Wells (The journey of Man). This guy is a geneticist and explorer who`s project was to trace the routes of early Man from Africa to current places. The genes, he says, tell that the darker (southern) races of India came directly to India (by sea or coastal route) from Africa. The `aryan` branch struck a more northernly route into central europe. Became `white` and developed longer noses, both due to the cold (became aryan!) and a sub branch then found its way into northern India.


`Lower caste being militarily defeated people`

If you read the ramayan/mahabharata, both krishna and arjun were `darkies`. Not your garden variety shade, but pitch dark. So was draupati. In the ramayana also, rama is `brown skinned`.

Even the brahmin Veda Vyasa, the author of mahabharata who appears in his own book (a la hitchcock) was dark, and ugly...beat that for humility you authors!

I was often mystified why the AmarChitraKatha comics showed these characters having a `blue` skin color! Looks like the artist was hesitant to show these `holy` characters having `unholy` skin color (black/brown) :)

So, it looks to me that in those times, caste was not color-based or feature-based.

As an aside, if you observe a really,really dark person, at times you can perceive a bluish tinge in the skin color.
Maybe its an illusion. But I`ve noticed it a few times, and marvelled.

Re: # 207

Thanks Urvasi. I give u my explanation after seeing some other replies. As for tendency of northerners, I guess it lies in their desire to getting jobs.

U raised another topic for discussion i.e reservations for non-Hindus. I personally am against caste-based reservations but reservations shud be based on caste+economic criteria.

In any case this topic wud be addressed by Indians differently in the coming decades.

Re: # 205

You conquered nobody - you are the example of the conquered, the vanquished, the losers... sanatani, on the otherhand, actually survived the conquest, his faith[pathetic as it may be] and culture in tact... :)

Jangy,

Howya know this? Iyengars, I think are pure - like Parsis - genetically. Iyers in the meanwhile are mix between the natives and Central Asians. Iyengars had dolico-cephalic index similar to pure Persians whereas - like half-castes (a term to denote children of a white and a black parents) - Iyers have the best of both though they are identified as Brahmins.

Even among Brahmins, Vaidic (variant of Vedic but nothing to do with Vaidyas) type are at the apex of Brahmins. Iyengars are sober and hardly get into arguments. They are brainy type, mostly.

Iyengars are mostly Vaishnavaites i.e people with vertival tilak. Iyers are Saivaites (though panthiestic like most Hindus) with vibhuti put sideways i.e horizontal (i.e Saivites). If u notice closely, Lord Ganesa wud have horizontal ash marks on his forehead whereas he`d have vertical tilak in Maharastra and north India. This corruption of Gods (vertical & horizontal tilaks) is the handiwork of artisans and the priests. Most of the hoi polloi do not see these finer points in iconography & the sleight of hand of priests & artisans who work at the behest of priests.

In short, Hindus make many changes of their gods, which the people of other religions consider as sin.

If u are familiar with Lord Siva, he`s a nocturnal God. His vehicle is Bull. There`s a caste of beggers in rural South India who worship Lord Siva. They come for begging at mid-nights. It`s embarrasing for us but they dont stop coming at mid-nights. They stop begging before sunrise.

India is too myriad to understand! If u read the speech of Jinnah at AIML in Ahmedabad, he acknowledges the enormity of Indian divesity (after 1930, I guess). He changes this view after he tastes electoral victory in 1940s.

Re: # 200

Bandopadhyaya, Mukhopadhyaya, etc. have the suffix upadhyaya, so the suffix was knocked out and an acharya added in its place - ya=ja=ji/ee, so Bandopadhyaya =Bando+acharya = Ban+acharji, etc. Bhattacharya has acharya, so it became simply Bhatt + acharja=acharji/ee. These names were made easier to pronounce for the British masters during the Raj - as we all know, the Brits are notorious for not being able to pronounce any non-Anglo name, not because the Bengalis themselves wanted an abbreviated version. In formal discourse as in wedding invitations in Bengali they still use the long and correct forms. Incidentally, the Calcutta University degrees used to have Bandopadhyaya etc instead of the more commonly used Banerjee, so that used to cause a lot of confusion when people provided their graduation and postgraduation degrees for jobs and so on outside Bengal. Sufferers have even had to provide affidavits saying that Banerjee and Bandopadhyaya were the same name. I don`t know if the practice persists.

Don`t know why Gangopadhyaya became Ganguly -perhaps because there`s a South Indian (Kannada?) surname Ganguly, and it`s certainly easier on the lips to say Ganguly? And Gangoji might be too like the Muslim surname Gangjee - there`s a very prominent Calcutta Muslim family with that name.

Incidentally, as a Bengali I was first introduced into the intricacies and the complexities and the stereotypes of castes only when I began to live in North India. In urban Bengal itself the educated middle-class individual knows what his /her own caste is but that`s it. And this has been the case for more than half a century.

It`s usual that adopted children take on the caste of their adoptive parents - this goes right back to the Mahabharata - like Karna, for instance. A Sharma of my acquaintance was adopted as a young boy by a Srivastava, and has retained his Kayastha identity, not his Brahmin one. But now that there`s a built-in advantage in retaining one`s SC/ST/OBC status, at least among North Indians, some adopted children (and their adoptive parents as well, occasionally) prefer to remain SC/ST/OBC. Which just shows that reservations might have done a lot, but they`ve certainly deepened the caste schisms in society and entrenched privilege even further. That`s why affirmative action needs to go beyond reservation.

But what I can`t understand is why a discussion on caste should degenerate into one on the superiority of one religion over another. And can someone explain why Christian and Muslim converts demand the privileges of being Dalits if Christianity and Islam were really egalitarian?

great board and posts, esp from harimau, warrier, sanatani, sadna, mohar, satya and many others. looks like the urban conversation seems to be more about defence of family culture rather than caste. personally i love castes, dont mean to undermine the ill-effects but the bio-diversity is fantastically fascinating...i always ask folks what their caste (as PC as possible) is and try to get their perceptions of others and themselves.

one question: IMObervation Iyengars are more fair than Iyers and Iyers have thicker lips...is there any explanation for this?

Re: # 204

The only maadar I`ll be chauding will be yours you fcuking hindu urophiliac. You`re still hung up over the fact that your dark brown asses were conquered by us for centuries and by the Christians and that your own people are leaving your pathetic excuse of a religion for other faiths in droves.

Ouch.

Re: # 201

NTSYED,

u have become intelligent. Only a fool tries to defend the indefensible. So no point trying to defend this MURDEROUS, MORONIC and hateful cult spread by that RAPIST, PEADOPHILE MURDERER MUHAMMED.

So happy with conversions to Islam wait till anti-jihad starts your neighbors who have truly reverted will murder motherrrfookers like you.

MUSLIMS ARE MADARZAATS BECAUSE ISLAM TEACHES MAADARZAATGI

Sanatani

Re: # 186
Harimau
This may seem funny but I am not in favour of quotas, I don`t think it has solved anything. But that is only my opinion.

MS Subbulakshmi and M L Vasanthakumari were Isai Vellalars, not Brahmins.

By the way I`m looking for a new copy of the Madras Quartet by Indira Menon. Is it still available in India or is it out of print?

ntsyed -- have you been practicing psychiatry without license.....:).

now tell me -- have you been hearing voices from God -- looks like you have -- that is called `` a classic case of`` schizophrenia -- get it from one who has the license to practice medicine -- I bet u did not know that daddy daddy is another expression for grand pa.....:)

i have been away for a while but i must have written something truthful because the fascist sanatani has got his saffron pants on fire. why? because more and more hindus are converting to islam/christianity/buddhism all the time --isn`t that why one of the state govts in india had to try and change the law to make conversions illegal?!!!

****
how can he still defend casteism?

******

as for his second stupid question he is obviously ignorant of islam or islamic history. muslim women have been great saints too: rabia al basri to name one, sayyidah nafisa e paak to name another (who was from quraysh) and there are many others. there have been whole books written about them--eg the great andalusian sufi ibn arabi mentions a whole number of his female spiritual guides and teachers in his book `sufis of andalusia`. and umm al mumineen sayyidah aisha siddiqah was one of the most learned of all the companions and the teacher of many of the great scholars of islam.

****
btw if u swear again in your post either to me or especially to any islamic personality i will not bother to respond to you anymore.

A small diversion. Bongs are needed to think abt it. Non-Bongs are welcome with their comments.

Chattopadhyaya is Chatterjee
Bandopadhyaya is Bannerjee
Mukhopadhyaya is Mukherjee
Gangopadhyaya is Ganguly (why change like this i/o Gangorjee or Garjee?)

BUT

Bhattacharya is not Bhattarjee. Why Why Why?

I guess abt the origins of the first batch names to .....jee but I cant guess why there`s no short name for Bhattacharya. I asked all bongs abt this but nobody cud give me a reply :-)

Any comments please???

Re: # 197
[....Once an OBC, always an OBC...]

May be... why?... what`s wrong with being ``always an OBC``?... By the way - I am OBC...so don`t pull that stunt on me... :)

Anyway - my point was: legally, your adopted child can still claim to be an OBC, if he/she chooses to do so, for the purpose of claiming benefits under affirmative action...

Alternately - if an OBC person adopts a brahmin child, I am not sure what happens... I would think the child should be able claim benefit under affirmative action...

this further illustrates how silly this whole caste thing is and why we urgently need to move beyond this...

Re: # 40

Sorry about the late entry here. I think the Bengalis you`re saying you know of belong to at least 3 generations back, when people made a great deal about being kulins. Besides, there are Mukhopadhyayas etc who are not kulins, and Lahiris, Bagchis etc., who are. Incidentally, Bhattacharya is a title for a priest, and not a surname/family name by itself. Biswas is also a title, and there are plenty of Kayasthas and at least one Brahmin family with that title. There are even Roys, Choudhurys and Roy Choudhurus (zamindars) who are Brahmins, Baidyas, Kayasthas, as well as SCs. Also Mallicks. So one can`t generalize like that!
Also, there are plenty of kulin Brahmins who aren`t the ``Aryan``-looking kind you`re thinking of - perhaps you`re mixing up Bengalis with certain South Indian Brahmin communities? Where the colour of the skin and the sharpness of the nose guarantees upper-caste status? That isn`t so in Bengal. But your generalizations wouldn`t be surprising - there`s so much ignorance within India itself about our own communities. The lesson is, don`t generalize from knowing just a few people from any community. And don`t confuse Bengalis with any North Indian language/caste groups! The rules in Bengal are quite different!
As for me, I belong to a kulin family myself, but we stopped bothering about this more than 2 generations ago. And we have plenty of non-kulin relatives who are certainly not outside the pale.
Moreover, all ``caste`` communities in Bengali, whether Brahmin, Kayastha or Baidya, have their own little kulin groups. ``Kulinity`` itself is quite a flexibile label - if a non-kulin marries a kulin, and his son marries a kulin, and his grandson also marries a kulin, the next generation becomes kulin! And Mondols are usually what North Indians/Biharis call OBCs! This feet-touching of SCs of Brahmins belongs to about 70 years ago, I believe, at least in the urban/semi-urban areas of Bengal. Unbelievable today.
Agreed, though, that the ``caste no bar`` tag in matrimonial adverts often also have an added ``SC please excuse``. But certainly Bengalis over the last 50 years at least, if not more, have not bothered about caste - what`s been much more important is education - and money. Perhaps, ranjit, you aren`t aware that Brahmins aren`t the richest class/caste in Bengal - it`s the so-called OBCs of North India like the ``shonar benes`` (the goldsmith caste), and certain Kayastha family who made a lot of money during the Raj. As far as education goes, the most ``forward`` community is the Baidyas. Which says a lot for education removing caste distinctions.
The main point, however, which seems to have got lost in all the verbiage that has followed, is that most of us in privileged positions have been born to where we have because somewhere some time at least one of our ancestors has swindled, short-changed, hurt and destroyed his rivals, to whatever caste he may have belonged. And this was no doubt made easier if the person he was exploiting belonged to the dalit community.So if an apology helps in any way we should all do so. More important, though, is what we do to see to it that it never happens again. Affirmative action - not necessarily only reservation in schools and colleges and in jobs - is what is necessary. And let`s not trivialize the issue by going into things like ``my God is better than yours``.

Ref mohar11 #194

[Re: # 191

take it easy dude... if the adopted child is indeed OBC he/she should be eligible for quota...
because caste is determined by birth, not by adoption...]

So your position is: once an OBC, always an OBC.

And you are accusing ME of casteism? That is rich.

Ref DRE (Digital Rectal Examination) #192

[#190 OK so u R married 2 ur cousin..]

If you would take a moment to pull your finger out of your @rse, you would realize that there was no such admission on my part.

But then, people like you who think that a book was handed down by some angel for eternity and so there is nothing new to be found by scientific inquiry, logical deduction, etc., cannot be faulted for ot being able to apply logic. Because, applying logic would tear down Al-Kitab, the Book to End All Books, the Koran.

By the way, in the English language 2 is a number; you might have been looking for the word `to`.

Re: # 192

DrDr,

In Indian English the usage of cousin sister shud be OK; otherwise u need to explain the gender of the cousin under consideration. (Btw cross-cousin marriages are common in south India, whereas it`s not in the north).

Perhaps Hari read too much of the books of old Madras i.e

1. Ramaswamy Iyer Mady Easy
2. Kuppuswamy Iyer Made Difficult.

He straddles between the two types effortlessly.

Hari`s casteist, I think. Next life his Gaandpathi or womeniser-god Krishna wud make him born in a family of Chaudries of west Punjab with thier deep connections with Kakul Academy.

Re: # 191

take it easy dude... if the adopted child is indeed OBC he/she should be eligible for quota...
because caste is determined by birth, not by adoption...

what`s the point here anyway?

btw haramiu its funny that u r lecturing on english as tho u were an englishman from 50 yrs ago. u r a fossil..

#190 OK so u R married 2 ur cousin..

Ref mohar11 #189

[... even though harimau does make a point once in a while - he is clearly going overboard for most part...]

Try answering the question I raised in #186 instead of making editorial comments.

Tough questions would require thinking; thinking would require logic. When that hasn`t been cultivated for the last 3,000 years, you will resort to editorial comments.

Notice how Soyaf@$*ingsauce has completely disappeared from the scene. He is delving through EVR`s books to see if there is any canned reply he can cut and paste.

Ref DrDr #188

[haramiu hows ur cousin sister wife?]

``Monkey see, monkey do`` is evident from your usage of the English language.

In the English language, there is no such thing as a cousin brother or a cousin sister. Cousins of both genders are called just cousins.

However, idiots like you make the mistake of calling a girl who is a cousin a cousin sister. If she was your sister, you wouldn`t marry her.

But then all Muslims are behnch0dhs.

Re: # 187

good post... even though harimau does make a point once in a while - he is clearly going overboard for most part...

haramiu hows ur cousin sister wife?

#180 by harimau

[You can walk down the streets of Chennai and find some small boards advertising that there is a music teacher living inside. You can be sure no OBC, MBC, SC, ST wants to take a course in music.

Right now there is the music season in Chennai. Almost all the persons in the classical music field belong to the upper castes. The only exception to this would surprise you: the descendants of devadasis are usually the dance teachers and nagaswaram players. ]

My sister (cousin) has learnt classical Bharat Natyam. And she also had couple of dance performance in one of the famous South Indian temples. Neither we are Tamils nor Brahmins nor descendants of devadasis nor were she interested in joining movies. It was just her interest from her schools days. I am not cooking these things up. You need to walk down the streets of Hyd.

[When the castes mix, the first thing to go down the tubes will be the arts. ]

What kind of stupid logic is this? When even Indian Muslims have not abandon classical art, (Zakir Hussain/Allah Rakha??), why do you think mixing castes would cause art to go down the tube?

[Nobody. Ask that motherf@$*er Soyaf@%*ingsauce if he would send his son to Veda school and accept a job as a priest. No frikking way! ]

Some 25yrs back, one of my relative, had sent their daughter to study Sanskrit and Vedas at Prayag Gurukul. She is very good at that, and is chief panditayeen whenever we do hawans, and I have myself learnt a quite a lot from her. Go and check at this school to see how many brah and non-brah are studying over there.

Anyway, debating with people like you is pointless. When we start getting rid of casteism, we will also have to get rid of people like you. Luckily for us, you are a very small group, paranoid, hiding and burning from within.

Ref swarrier #184

[Harimau
Let us for a moment consider that you were to adopt shall we say an infant dalit girl and were to bring her up as you would any other child raised in a modern Brahmin household.]

Great question.

Let us not consider anything like you said.

Let facts stand for themselves.

I have two different nephews who have adopted two children each from adoption agencies in India. All the children are growing up in India. At least in the case of one nephew, it is possible to know the true parents of the adopted children despite all the laws regarding closed adoptions.

Are these kids eligible for OBC/MBC quotas? If yes, why? If not, why not?

Let me see any one of you bleeding-heart, knee-jerk liberals come up with an answer to THAT question.

[There is also an outside chance that she could become a Sudha Raghunathan...]

God forbid!

Re: # 184
I`d like to add that I am not being patronising in the previous post. We are to a large extent a product of the environment and society into which we are born. Continued adversity will not help build a better society all the time.

Re: # 180
Harimau
Let us for a moment consider that you were to adopt shall we say an infant dalit girl and were to bring her up as you would any other child raised in a modern Brahmin household.

Perhaps you would agree that there is a great possiblilty that she will be like countless other Brahmin children who would be average at, but able to appreciate the niceties of classical music. There is also an outside chance that she could become a Sudha Raghunathan or a Jayanthi.

If we agree on that then why should we continue to support the more misanthropic aspects of the caste system?

Re: 182

(should hang their hands in same.) should read ``hang their heads in shame.``

Regards

Aisha boudi,

(Look at India, Gandhi sexually abused minors all the time, and Gawd was it abuse given his unattractive structure)

Are you saying that if he had been attractive it would not have been abuse. And in any case, his nieces I believe were over 18 when he performed ``brahmacharya`` with them.

(Especially when a sp