Post by krsiyer on Aug 16, 2012 16:01:37 GMT 5.5
Who is Responsible for the Decay of Varna Dharma? Part III
As if to exacerbate this ill-will, the Brahmin took one more disastrous step. On the one hand he gave up the dharma of his caste and joined hands with the British in condemning the old order by branching it a barbarous one in which one man exploited another. But, on the other hand, though he spoke the language of equality, he kept aloof from other castes thinking himself to be superior to them. If in the past he had not mixed physically with members of other castes, it did not mean that he had placed himself on a high pedestal. We must remember that there was a reason for his not coming into physical contact with other castes. There have to be differences between the JATIs based on food, work and surroundings. The photographer needs a dark room to develop his films. To shoot a film, on the contrary, powerful lights are needed. Those who work in a factory canteen have to scrupulously clean; but those who dust machinery wear soiled clothes. This does not mean that the waiter in a canteen is superior to the factory hand who dusts machines. The man who takes the utmost care to keep himself intellectually bright, without any thought of himself, observes fasts, while the soldier, who has to be strong and tough, eats meat.
Why should there be bad feelings between the two, between the Brahmin and the Kshatriya? Does the Brahmin have to come into physical contact with the Kshatriya To prove that he does not bear any ill-will towards him? If he intertwined with the Kshatriya he would be tempted to taste meat and such a temptation might eventually drag him into doing things that militate against his own duty. Each community has its own duties, customs and food habits. If all JATIs mixed together on the pretext of equality without regard to their individual ways of life, all work would suffer and society itself would be plunged into confusion.
It was with a definite purpose in view that the village was divided into different quarters: the agrahara (the Brahmin quarter), the agriculturist’s quarter and so on. Such a division was possible in rural life but not in the new urban way of living. With urbanization and industrialization it becomes necessary for people belonging to various JATIs to work together on the same shift, sit together in the same canteen to eat the same kind of food. The Brahmin for whom it is obligatory to observe fasts and vows and to perform various rites was now seen to be no different from others. Office and college timings were a hindrance to the carrying out of these rites. So the Brahmin threw them to the winds. He had so far taken care to perform these rites with the good of others in mind. Like a trustee, he had protected dharma for the sake of society and made its fruits available to all. All that belonged to the past. Now the Brahmin came forward proclaiming that all were equal and that he was one with the rest. All the same he became the cause of heart-burning among others and –ironically enough- in becoming one with them he also competed with them for jobs. That apart, though he talked of equality, he still thought himself to be superior to others, in spite of the fact that he was not a bit more careful than they about the performance of religious duties. Was this not enough to earn him more hatred?
The Brahmin spoiled himself and spoiled others. By abandoning his dharma he became a bad example to others. As a matter of fact, even by strictly adhering to his dharma the Brahmin in not entitled to feel superior to others. He must always remain humble in the belief that "everyone performs a function in society; I perform mine". If at all others respected him in the past and accorded him a high place in the society it was in consideration of his selfless work, his life of austerity a, discipline and purity. Now he had descended too such depths as to merit their most abrasive criticism. It is my decided opinion that the Brahmin is responsible for the ruin of Hindu society. Some people have found an explanation for it.
Jaya jaya sankara, hara hara sankara !
Source: Voice of Paramacharya – Hindu Dharma.
As if to exacerbate this ill-will, the Brahmin took one more disastrous step. On the one hand he gave up the dharma of his caste and joined hands with the British in condemning the old order by branching it a barbarous one in which one man exploited another. But, on the other hand, though he spoke the language of equality, he kept aloof from other castes thinking himself to be superior to them. If in the past he had not mixed physically with members of other castes, it did not mean that he had placed himself on a high pedestal. We must remember that there was a reason for his not coming into physical contact with other castes. There have to be differences between the JATIs based on food, work and surroundings. The photographer needs a dark room to develop his films. To shoot a film, on the contrary, powerful lights are needed. Those who work in a factory canteen have to scrupulously clean; but those who dust machinery wear soiled clothes. This does not mean that the waiter in a canteen is superior to the factory hand who dusts machines. The man who takes the utmost care to keep himself intellectually bright, without any thought of himself, observes fasts, while the soldier, who has to be strong and tough, eats meat.
Why should there be bad feelings between the two, between the Brahmin and the Kshatriya? Does the Brahmin have to come into physical contact with the Kshatriya To prove that he does not bear any ill-will towards him? If he intertwined with the Kshatriya he would be tempted to taste meat and such a temptation might eventually drag him into doing things that militate against his own duty. Each community has its own duties, customs and food habits. If all JATIs mixed together on the pretext of equality without regard to their individual ways of life, all work would suffer and society itself would be plunged into confusion.
It was with a definite purpose in view that the village was divided into different quarters: the agrahara (the Brahmin quarter), the agriculturist’s quarter and so on. Such a division was possible in rural life but not in the new urban way of living. With urbanization and industrialization it becomes necessary for people belonging to various JATIs to work together on the same shift, sit together in the same canteen to eat the same kind of food. The Brahmin for whom it is obligatory to observe fasts and vows and to perform various rites was now seen to be no different from others. Office and college timings were a hindrance to the carrying out of these rites. So the Brahmin threw them to the winds. He had so far taken care to perform these rites with the good of others in mind. Like a trustee, he had protected dharma for the sake of society and made its fruits available to all. All that belonged to the past. Now the Brahmin came forward proclaiming that all were equal and that he was one with the rest. All the same he became the cause of heart-burning among others and –ironically enough- in becoming one with them he also competed with them for jobs. That apart, though he talked of equality, he still thought himself to be superior to others, in spite of the fact that he was not a bit more careful than they about the performance of religious duties. Was this not enough to earn him more hatred?
The Brahmin spoiled himself and spoiled others. By abandoning his dharma he became a bad example to others. As a matter of fact, even by strictly adhering to his dharma the Brahmin in not entitled to feel superior to others. He must always remain humble in the belief that "everyone performs a function in society; I perform mine". If at all others respected him in the past and accorded him a high place in the society it was in consideration of his selfless work, his life of austerity a, discipline and purity. Now he had descended too such depths as to merit their most abrasive criticism. It is my decided opinion that the Brahmin is responsible for the ruin of Hindu society. Some people have found an explanation for it.
Jaya jaya sankara, hara hara sankara !
Source: Voice of Paramacharya – Hindu Dharma.
