Take another look, and the statement by Ms r implies "all Brahmins have merit, nobody else has any", which is too stupid for a Brahmin to think or say.
Go deeper, and the statement from Ms r exposes the following - while conversionist religions demand faith in institutions and book that control mind of the followers of those religions, demanding that followers stop independent thinking and absolutely no arguments allowed, on the contrary Hindu thinking only offers knowledge without asking people to stop thinking, and in fact one is not only told one can become one with the Divine, one is celebrated if one finds a new path.
Only Hinduism has and can produce great spiritual beings such as Buddha, Vivekananda, and hundreds more, of every caste - and yes, not restricted to male gender either. Because no stop is put on greatness being born or blossomed into its full extent of greatness.
Reflect on this - while priests and teachers have been Brahmin, Gods and Goddesses and saints and generally spiritual persona were of various castes. And do the worshippers care what caste Gods and Goddesses are when incarnated? Ridiculous.
This is just one facet of the larger picture. Indian castes are different from the castes elsewhere. The former are categorisation of works of males, while the latter, castes everywhere outside India, are about power, wealth and race. And women aren't on par except in Hinduism, in India.
So if Ms r thinks merit is Brahmin, there is a germ of truth there, which us the following. It's not that anyone thinks brains or merit is equated with or restricted to Brahmins. It's a greater picture in the sense of Indian system as different from caste systems elsewhere. India did establish a far superior system in not putting power and wealth, gender and race as criteria, and such thought is superior to the more primitive structures of other cultures and faiths, where it's about "have faith, stop questioning, arguing is sin, bow down to power, bow down to wealth, women are less, lighter colours of physical parts such as skin or hair or eyes is superior not only in beauty but in every other quality, ..."!!!!
No, India never had such stupid diktat.
And one more thing common outside India but never part of Indian culture, is "droit de seigneur", the landlord's absolute right to every female in his domain.
India on the contrary has the great epics where a woman can refuse a powerful man in Ramayana; a king in Mahaabhaarata goes to the woman's father to ask for her hand even though they are poor and not high caste, and the father refuses until promised his daughter's children will rule, and they do.
So much for those who denounce Hinduism, India, for Indian caste system.
Look into your own hearts and ask, who would rather be a poor Brahmin than a powerful king, a wealthy trader? For Brahmins have generally been poor, since they aren't allowed to charge for services as priests or teachers (unlike people in trade or plying crafts), and must accept only what is offered.
The anti Brahmin drive was the colonial regimes' drive to break the spine of Indian culture, set in words by Macaulay and followed thereafter with more righteousness assumed fraudulently, but used before too by other regimes. But fraud it was and is.
https://scontent-sin6-2.xx.fbcdn.net/...
Go deeper, and the statement from Ms r exposes the following - while conversionist religions demand faith in institutions and book that control mind of the followers of those religions, demanding that followers stop independent thinking and absolutely no arguments allowed, on the contrary Hindu thinking only offers knowledge without asking people to stop thinking, and in fact one is not only told one can become one with the Divine, one is celebrated if one finds a new path.
Only Hinduism has and can produce great spiritual beings such as Buddha, Vivekananda, and hundreds more, of every caste - and yes, not restricted to male gender either. Because no stop is put on greatness being born or blossomed into its full extent of greatness.
Reflect on this - while priests and teachers have been Brahmin, Gods and Goddesses and saints and generally spiritual persona were of various castes. And do the worshippers care what caste Gods and Goddesses are when incarnated? Ridiculous.
This is just one facet of the larger picture. Indian castes are different from the castes elsewhere. The former are categorisation of works of males, while the latter, castes everywhere outside India, are about power, wealth and race. And women aren't on par except in Hinduism, in India.
So if Ms r thinks merit is Brahmin, there is a germ of truth there, which us the following. It's not that anyone thinks brains or merit is equated with or restricted to Brahmins. It's a greater picture in the sense of Indian system as different from caste systems elsewhere. India did establish a far superior system in not putting power and wealth, gender and race as criteria, and such thought is superior to the more primitive structures of other cultures and faiths, where it's about "have faith, stop questioning, arguing is sin, bow down to power, bow down to wealth, women are less, lighter colours of physical parts such as skin or hair or eyes is superior not only in beauty but in every other quality, ..."!!!!
No, India never had such stupid diktat.
And one more thing common outside India but never part of Indian culture, is "droit de seigneur", the landlord's absolute right to every female in his domain.
India on the contrary has the great epics where a woman can refuse a powerful man in Ramayana; a king in Mahaabhaarata goes to the woman's father to ask for her hand even though they are poor and not high caste, and the father refuses until promised his daughter's children will rule, and they do.
So much for those who denounce Hinduism, India, for Indian caste system.
Look into your own hearts and ask, who would rather be a poor Brahmin than a powerful king, a wealthy trader? For Brahmins have generally been poor, since they aren't allowed to charge for services as priests or teachers (unlike people in trade or plying crafts), and must accept only what is offered.
The anti Brahmin drive was the colonial regimes' drive to break the spine of Indian culture, set in words by Macaulay and followed thereafter with more righteousness assumed fraudulently, but used before too by other regimes. But fraud it was and is.
https://scontent-sin6-2.xx.fbcdn.net/...
No comments:
Post a Comment