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

An Untouchable Apology
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`.

An Untouchable Apology
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 :)

An Untouchable Apology 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!

An Untouchable Apology #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.

An Untouchable Apology
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 :)

An Untouchable Apology
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 :)

An Untouchable Apology
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)?

An Untouchable Apology
`..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.

An Untouchable Apology
Isn`t anyone going to speculate on how the caste-system might have begun?
Overpopulation? less jobs - so skills have to be passed from father to son?, etc.

Nah! In India the caste-system has been institutionalised and given religious sanction.
How did that happen, and thruout the whole country?

How far back does it go in time?
Quite far back it seems - both the ramayan and mahabharata talk about castes.

But, I was surprised to note that `Vasistha Yoga` (which I consider to be THE book on hindu philosophy and far,far ahead of the Gita), has NO mention of caste!

Imran Khan the Politician
As an Imran fan, I had purchased and read both his biographies many years ago.

One memory lingers. He wrote:
`Who was I to argue with fate that had sprinked me liberally with stardust`.
An eulogy for `having connections`.
He got selected for the national team at age 18, thanks to uncle Javed Burki who was a selector, and off course bombed at the test matches.

Another memory is his interview long ago along with Gavaskar.
When asked if Indo-Pak matches generated more passion among the players, Sunil answered truthfully that yes, it does, what with 3 wars behind us.
Imran to my amazement said no, theres nothing special.
Was he kidding or what? wasn`t Gen Niazi from his tribe?

#9 by rf786, makes sense to me.
>>Fact is, Khan is a by-product of the same corrupt, remote controlled system that has >>given us the lotas (opportunists), feudals (soulless) and mullahs (double-faced).

Speculation on the Life Hereafter Wah!Wah!

India, Pakistan and the Kashmir dispute Salim_Chauhan
>>>I will not apologize for my hopes and dreams.

More power to you Sir!

Won`t it would be interesting, just for fun, to list the gains/losses for both countries, after such a reunification, however unlikely.

India, Pakistan and the Kashmir dispute `undoing partition`

Unlikely, but what a nice thought.

Speaking more practically, since both countries are sport crazy, I think fielding joint teams for cricket/hockey at world/asia cups will bring tremendous `togatherness`.

What a thrill it would be to watch akhtar steaming in with `Greater India` emblazoned on the chest!

If only he would straighten that arm a bit :)

Killing Darwin From wikipedia:
Reductionism in science can have several different senses. One type of reductionism is the belief that all fields of study are ultimately amenable to scientific explanation. Perhaps a historical event might be explained in sociological and psychological terms, which in turn might be described in terms of human physiology, which in turn might be described in terms of chemistry and physics. The historical event will have been reduced to a physical event. This might be seen as implying that the historical event was `nothing but` the physical event, denying the existence of emergent phenomena.

Philosopher, please correct me.
I think what you mean by `failing of reductionism` is that - the cause-effect chain has to stop somewhere.

IOW, the `first` cause was itself caused by `nothing`. It was causeless.
The more ancient religions often refer to God as `the causeless one`.
Which means I guess, they too knew where reductionism was leading.

There is no such thing as philosophy-free science.
There is only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on board without examination.
—Daniel Dennett, Darwin`s Dangerous Idea, 1995.

Killing Darwin Philospher, it will be helpful to your interested readers if your `train of thought` takes an occasional station-stop and change of line
:)

You`re absolutely right about the `constant` self/mind and the reduction principle.
This same idea was known to the ancients.

The hindu texts for example, say the first thing that gets created is `aham-kar` (What a beautiful word!). The sound of `Me`. Me-ness. Self-awareness - the very essence of life, intelligence.

Aham-kar creates the mind and everything else. Those ancient dudes did think deep.

---

Does darwinism contradict religion?

Off course darwinism does contrdict the medieval religions (Islam, Christianity), which say God made everything in a flash (ok, 7 days).
And God being God, there can be no possibility of `improvement` on His creation.

The Hindu texts are a little more elaborate. Here`s from the SuryaSiddhnta:
``One hundred times four hundred and seventy four divine years passed while the all-wise was employed in creating the animate and inanimate creation, plants, stars, gods, demons and the rest``

1 divine year (year of the gods) = 360 human years.

So Brahma took about 17 million human years to create everything.
He certainly took his time!

In essense however, the Hindu belief is the same as Islam and Christianity.
Humans, animals, plants, etc were `created`, not evolved.
And this Darwinism appears to contradict.