Discussion on caste – more

–Varta continued–

My response to Kharaharapriya is much delayed. Readers will find the continuation from the previous thread here;

Pala S writes: Well yes, there were Shudra dynasties  as truly as there were Kshatriya and Brahmin dynasties.

Consider this – An inscription of Singaya-Nayaka (1368

The three castes, viz. Brahmanas and the next [Kshatriyas and Vaishyas], were produced from the face, the arms and the thighs of the Lord; and for their support was born the fourth caste from His feet. That this caste is purer than the former [three] is self-evident; for this caste was born along with the river Ganges [which also springs from his feet], the purifier of the three worlds. The members of this caste are eagerly attentive to their duties, not wicked, pure-minded, and are devoid of passion and other such blemishes; they ably bear all the burdens of the earth by helping those born in the kingly caste.

Another inscription relates how his relative Kapaya-Nayaka “rescued the Andhra country from the ravages of the Mohammedans.

As you rightly say, one cannot fault Ambedkar for being so bitter about his people’s fate. He was always open about his preference for British rule rather than a rule of what he called “Brahmin raj”. I gather this bitterness is an offshoot of untouchable experiences under the Peshwas. (I think we should look at this aspect much more closely)

Your reference to Annamacharya kritis is very interesting to me. I need to study that aspect now.

On the purusha sukta, Ambedkar was of the opinion that it was a later interpolation by ambitious Brahmins. I don’t know any better. However, even this sukta may be interpreted positively just like you have done. It certainly is not the bottom-line in caste relations.

What I found unique in my experience at Irupu falls was that this Brahmin farmer was a poor farmer and a Kodagu native. He spoke the Kodagu tongue. He was very much at home there. So strange in light of all the anti-Brahmin propaganda we folks are used to hearing. Btw, my own family and my in-laws too are agricultural Brahmins.

Here you go on Shri Dharampal’s works.

Ananda Coomaraswamywas Lankan and of mixed parentage. His mother was British. He is considered to be a great authority on Hindu-Buddhist studies. I have not yet read his works.

I am very keen to pursue our understanding on untouchability. This seems to be the key in order to understand injustices emanating from the caste system.

Kharaharapriya writes on 24 may:

Thanks. Will get back to you. I hope my previous comment was not the reason for your anger. (Pala S – No, not at all!)

Here is one kriti of Annamacharya in telugu . Watch for these words.

meNDaina brahmANuDu meTTu bhUmi okaTE caNDAlundEti sari bhUmi okaTE

Meaning: Brahmins stay on the same earth that the chandalas or untouchables inhabitate.

Look at what Kanakadasa had to say on this.

Ramanujacharya, its believed gave deeksha to umpteen number of shudras and pulled them into Vishistadvaita fold.

All these people never faulted Hinduism, they were in-fact parama-bhaktas. They only faulted the Hindus who had scant understanding of the tenets, but behaved like authorities on Hinduism. All the above factors also indicate one basic fact that Hindu society itself has had movements of reform against caste discrimination and untouchability. The success of these movements in the long term is debatable. But however to say that Hindu society was deeply entrenched in caste discrimination and Hinduism perpetrates the same , as construed by anti-Hindu forces, according to me is utter nonsense.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: