Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Fwd: Like Dalits, Kshatriyas & Vaishyas Should have Their own Priests



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ashok T. Jaisinghani <ashokjai@sancharnet.in>
Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 6:56 PM
Subject: Like Dalits, Kshatriyas & Vaishyas Should have Their own Priests
T

Like Dalits, Kshatriyas & Vaishyas
Should have Their own Priests
 
    For thousands of years, the worst atrocities have been committed against the untouchable lower castes in India at the behest of the extremely arrogant Brahmins. Many Brahmins want to continue the highly divisive hereditary caste system because they staunchly believe that their caste is divine, and they must be worshipped as the Gods on Earth by all the other castes of the Hindu community. 
 
    The bigoted Brahmins still advocate and justify the discrimination based on the hereditary caste system, discrimination against women, untouchability, the Devadaasi system of prostitution and practice of adultery, polygamy, slavery, the custom of Satee, etc. They also continue to oppose the appointment of priests and teachers from the lower castes. Even today, many Brahmins refuse to accept reforms, which call for the eradication of many wrong beliefs and evil practices among the Hindus. 
 
    The bigoted Brahmins continue to believe in their own divinity and advocate the worship of Brahmins as the Gods on Earth who can treat all the working class people as Shudras or hereditary slaves. They also want all the Hindus to drink cow's urine and eat bullshit. In short, the bigoted Brahmins want to bring back the same old fascism and totalitarianism of their bigoted ancestors. If they have their way, such bigoted Brahmins can only bring many more misfortunes and disasters to India.  
 
Treacherous Divide & Rule Policy of Brahmins 
 
    For their own extremely selfish interests, many Brahmins have followed the Divide And Rule Policy ever since they created the caste system in ancient India many thousand years back. It does not matter for such selfish Brahmins whether the highly divisive caste system has always weakened the Hindu community and even brought India under the rule of foreigners for many centuries.
 
The caste system of the bigoted Brahmins had prevented the majority of the Vaishyas and Shudras from fighting against the invaders.
 
    Why are the Brahmins indulging in just empty talk about the teachings of the Bhaagvad Geeta, Puraans and Upanishads, when the lower castes among the Hindus have been terrorized for many centuries due to the extremely evil ideology of Brahminism?
 
Raavan Symbolizes Debauchery of Brahmins
 
    We must remember that in the great epic, Raamaayan, the most evil Brahmin King Raavan is described as the descendant of Brahma, whom all the Brahmins worship as their God and ancestor. The Brahmin King Raavan symbolizes the worst debauchees among the bigoted Brahmins who believe in and practise polygamy, abduction, rape, adultery, fraud, murder and other crimes.
 
    There are many cranks among the Brahmins who still want all the Hindus to believe that their debauchee Brahmin ancestors were responsible for saving and preserving the great culture and spiritual heritage of the Hindus! Could such debauchee Brahmins have provided the proper leadership to the Hindus? Yet, these Brahmin debauchees have the great gumption to give sermons on the lofty virtues and benefits of Brahmacharya, which is the name they use for celibacy that they themselves don't practise. 
  
 
Why did Godse kill Mahatma Gandhi?
 
    The whole world knows about the crime of the TERRORIST Nathuram Godse who killed Mahatma Gandhi. Many Brahmins still consider Nathuram Godse as one of the greatest patriotic heroes of India, whose idols are worshipped by the bigoted Brahmins, especially in the state of Maharashtra.
 
    We should note that Nathuram Godse was NOT the ONLY Brahmin who had conspired to kill Mahatma Gandhi. A number of bigoted Brahmins were part of the Nathuram Godse gang who had hatched the Brahmin conspiracy to murder Mahatma Gandhi.
 
    
The Brahmin Nathuram Godse could justify his killing of Mahatma Gandhi because the bigoted Brahmins believe that a Brahmin has every right to kill a lowly Bania or Vaishya for any reason. The bigoted Brahmins do not consider it a crime or sin for any Brahmin like Nathuram Godse to kill a Vaishya, even if he were great or important like Mahatma Gandhi. So, such Brahmins insist that the Indian Courts had wrongly ordered the hanging of a Brahmin like Nathuram Godse. 
 
     The blame for the Partition of India is still wrongly being put by the bigoted Brahmins on Mahatma Gandhi who was absolutely against the Partition of our country. The other top leaders of the Indian National Congress had actually decided to partition India without even consulting Mahatma Gandhi. The real facts of History prove that it was Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel and other Congress leaders who forced Mahatma Gandhi to accept their decision to partition India.
 
    As the leader of the Interim Government and the Constituent Assembly, Jawaharlal Nehru was the main person who was legally responsible for the Partition of India, but the bigoted Brahmin Nathuram Godse could never even dream about killing another Brahmin like Nehru for the crime. After the Independence, the bigoted Brahmins decided that somebody had to be blamed for the Partition of India and must be killed for that crime.
 
    So the bigoted Brahmin Nathuram Godse chose to kill Mahatma Gandhi only because he was a lowly Vaishya who had become too important and too popular for the comfort of all the bigoted Brahmins. By killing Mahatma Gandhi, Nathuram Godse actually helped a fellow Brahmin, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, to consolidate the rule of Brahmins over India.
 
    What can the Hindus of other castes expect from the Brahmins who  proudly worship the bigoted Brahmin Nathuram Godse who murdered Mahatma Gandhi? Many of the atrocities committed against the lower castes and outcastes are also a form of terrorism, which has been practised for thousands of years due to the evil ideology of the Brahmins.
 
    Even if they have the most pleasant manners, many Brahmins are mentally and ideologically some of the most merciless fascists and totalitarians in the world. Such cunning Brahmins know how to make use of their knowledge of Psychology to exploit the people of other castes.
 
    Like any other human being, Mahatma Gandhi too was not a perfect person. Even though he was called the Father of the Nation by his followers, Mahatma Gandhi could never have been perfect like what God is believed to be. One of his biggest faults was his inability to see through the flattery of the most cunning Brahmin like Jawaharlal Nehru, who knew how to use Gandhiji for achieving his own selfish goals. Jawaharlal Nehru had succeeded in using Mahatma Gandhi even to become the first Prime Minister of free India, though the majority of Congressmen had preferred Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, a Kshatriya, for that post. 
 
    Some centuries back, the Brahmin Peshwas had usurped power from the Maratha kings who were the descendants of Chhatrapati Shivaji, the founder of the Maratha Empire.
 
    With the help of their Divide And Rule Policy, the cunning and crafty Brahmins are always conspiring to grab power from the Kshatriyas and steal the wealth of the Vaishyas. The bigoted Brahmins believe that all the laws and regulations made by them are meant only for the other castes to follow. The same laws and regulations do not apply to the Brahmins who can break them at any time it suits them.
 
Brahmins worship Mass Murderer Parshuram
 
    How evil is the ideology of Brahminism can be very clearly understood from the story of the Brahmin called Parshuram, who had killed all the Kshatriyas of the world. According to Hindu mythology,  Maharishi Parshuram was a mass murderer and a TERRORIST who killed all the Kshatriyas 21 times. The bigoted Brahmins feel extremely proud while referring to the GENOCIDE of Kshatriyas committed by Maharishi Parshuram, whom the Brahmins consider as one of their greatest ancestors. Why do the Brahmins proudly worship their most ruthless mythological ancestor who had committed the total genocide of the Kshatriya caste?
 
    One can only guess how cruel and evil Brahminism can be from the story of the mass murderer Parshuram, who can be described as a demon many times more evil than even another monster Brahmin called Raavan. Should it be surprising to know why the Brahmins very proudly worship the monster Maharishi Parshuram as one of their most important Gods? 
 
    The bigoted Brahmins have been very cunning in comparing the extremely ruthless mass murderer Maharishi Parshuram with the most highly revered Hindu Gods like Raam and Krishna! After all, Maharishi Parshuram was a Brahmin who could commit mass murders, and still be considered right by the bigoted Brahmins, because the Brahmins believe that they can never be wrong. Is it not clear that the Brahmins believe in practising GENOCIDE
 
Bigoted Brahmins have planned
GENOCIDE of 400 million Hindus!
 
    Most of the Kshatriyas don't even know that many of the bigoted Brahmins are their enemies. Does the story of the mass murderer Maharishi Parshuram not indicate that the bigoted Brahmins are the worst enemies of the Kshatriyas? Unfortunately, most of the Kshatriyas have not yet realized that many Brahmins only have contempt and hatred for the Kshatriyas. There are many Brahmins who consider the Kshatriyas to be inferior human beings, and are constantly working against the Kshatriyas just like they are working against the interests of Vaishyas, Shudras and the untouchable outcastes.
 
    Recently, the bigoted Brahmins have come out with their most diabolical plan that can cause the world's worst GENOCIDE, in which the Brahmins want 400 million Hindus to die while killing 200 million Indian Muslims and Christians in a total communal war in India.
 
    When the bigoted Brahmins have hatched a massive conspiracy against the Hindus, Muslims and Christians of India, why should we miss the chance of making the whole world know the real nature of the extremely evil leaders of such Brahmins? We should get the bigoted Brahmins discredited and condemned by all the people of the world, including the majority of Hindus. The most dangerous criminals among the bigoted Brahmins must be fully exposed to prevent the start of a total communal war, which might cause the deaths of 600 million Indians.
 
Bigoted Brahmins Practise Character Assassination
 
    To denigrate the royal family of Marathas, some bigoted Brahmins had even dared to cast aspersions on the character of Jijabai, the revered mother of Chhatrapati Shivaji who had founded the Maratha empire. In recent times also, such Brahmins have deliberately and maliciously resorted to their evil practice of character assassination of the great leaders from other castes such as Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and many others. 
 
 
    Why do the dogmatic Brahmins claim that they have the right to insult all the Hindus of other castes and think that they are going to get away with all their nonsense? Why should such dogmatic Brahmins expect respect from others when they make derogatory comments about persons of other castes? We must expose them for their extremely offensive campaign of vilification and character assassination, which they have been continuing against others for a long time.
 
    To understand my point more clearly, you should read what a Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader, Prof (Dr) Radhasyam Brahmachari has said about the father of Raam who is the most revered God of the Hindus:
 
    "It also seems to me that Dasharath was not the biological father of Ram and his three brothers. Their biological father was Rishi Hrishyashringa."
 
    According to Prof Radhasyam Brahmachari, Raam and his three brothers were the illegitimate sons of a Brahmin called Rishi Hrishyashringa. Does he mean to say that the most revered God of the Hindus was a bastard son of some Brahmin called Rishi Hrishyashringa!  
 
    Why has he started a dangerous controversy, which can prove to be more explosive than the one created by some objectionable references in James Laine's book about Chhatrapati Shivaji, his mother Jijabai and the Brahmin called Dadoji Konddev?  
 
    While the controversy about the Brahmin Dadoji Konddev, caused by the Brahmins who assisted James Laine in writing his book, is mainly restricted to Maharashtra, the highly dangerous controversy that Prof Radhasyam Brahmachari has created about Raam's biological father is likely to affect all the Hindus of India and the rest of the world.
 
     Why should we not condemn such dogmatic Brahmins, who have criminal intentions, merely because they belong to the Brahmin caste? 
 
Bigoted Brahmins Deliberately Provoke Us
 
    The bigoted Brahmins cannot have the right to launch extremely offensive campaigns of vilification and character assassination against the Hindus of other castes. Two years back, I had advised them to stop their offensive tirade against me if they didn't want me to retaliate. Instead of listening to my advice, they just vilified me more and more, laughed at me and challenged my ability to do anything against them. By now, I have written many articles against the perverted beliefs and practices of the dogmatic Brahmins, which have already been published on many websites. I cannot withdraw my articles against the bigoted Brahmins because the articles are on the websites that belong to others. 
 
 
    The modern Hindus cannot accept the bogus belief of any Brahmin like Aditi Banerjee who, in her letter to the Hindu American Foundation, has falsely stated, "Manu . . . was our first law-giver and the forefather of all humans and all Hindus, and various of our Hindu scriptures." Who is Aditi Banerjee to claim that Manu was the forefather of all humans and all Hindus? Can she prove what she claims about Manu?
 
    Was Rishi Manu the biggest polygamist in History, due to which the Brahmins call him the forefather of all humans? During the time he lived, did all the women become the wives, keeps and prostitutes of Brahmin Manu? Were all the other men of Brahmin Manu's time only a pack of hijraas (eunuchs), who neither married any women nor produced any children? Or did the Brahmin called Rishi Manu kill all the other men and married all the women?
 
    Aditi Bannerjee should read the forwarded article, Excerpts from Ancient Brahmin Literature written by K. V. Narasimhan, to understand how the extremely evil Manu Smriti denigrates the women and the Shudras, who are described as hereditary slaves that cannot be freed from slavery. Manu Smriti contains some of the most rotten things any person can think of. The full article is being forwarded by a separate email.
 
    Aditi Banerjee has justified the primitive belief of dogmatic Brahmins, which explains that the lower castes suffer from the inequality based on hereditary discrimination because of the Karma of their previous births. That is the most well-known way that the bigoted Brahmins have been justifying the atrocities that are being committed against the lower castes for thousands of years. Such a hereditary discrimination, based on the belief in the principle of Karma of previous lives, is still being proudly considered by the bigoted Brahmins as the very foundation of Hinduism! Due to this false belief, the dogmatic Brahmins have been openly declaring that they shall never agree to any major reforms in the Hindu community.
 
    The following are some of the most atrocious Laws of Manu Smriti as mentioned in the Excerpts from Ancient Brahmin Literature:
A Brahman male can have any woman in the universe. (Manu XXVII-6 & 9).
 
A hundred-year-old Kshatriya must treat a ten-year old Brahman boy as his father. (Manu 11-135).
 
Those who educate Sudras and women will go to hell. (Manu III-156).
 
Killing a woman, a Sudra or an atheist is not sinful. Woman is an embodiment of the worst desires, hatred, deceit, jealousy and bad character. Woman should never be given freedom. (Manu IX-14, 17 and V-14, 47).
 
Even if someone frees a Sudra from slavery, he continues to be slave as he is created for slavery. Nobody has the right to free him. (Manu VIII-56 & 59).
 
A Brahman male by virtue of his birth becomes the first husband of all women in the 'universe'. (Manu III-14).
    According to the Laws of Manu, even forcible sex with any woman by a Brahmin cannot be considered a crime. Manu too must have raped many women as a habitual rapist, but he could not have been charged with any crime, as the Brahmins had the divine right to do anything and could not be punished. On the basis of the Laws made by Manu, the Brahmins were divine persons who were free to do anything. 
 
    According to the Laws of Manu, it can be argued that the Brahmin King Raavan did nothing wrong when he abducted Seeta, the consort of Bhagwaan Raam. It can also be argued that Bhagwaan Raam was wrong in killing the Brahmin Raavan for getting back his wife Seeta. The Brahmins consider themselves to be more divine than even the Gods and Goddesses! As a mere Kshatriya, even Bhagwaan Raam could be considered as inferior to the Brahmin Raavan, if the Laws of Manu were used!
 
    It should also not be surprising that many Brahmins still believe that Nathuram Godse had a divine right to kill any Vaishya like Mahatma Gandhi, and that the Indian Courts had no right to order the hanging of a Brahmin like Nathuram Godse. According to the Laws of Manu, a Brahmin cannot be punished for murdering a low-caste Vaishya. 
 
    How could any Brahmin like Nathuram Godse be punished for killing just one Vaishya when, according to the Hindu mythology, Maharishi Parshuram could exercise his divine right to commit the genocide of Kshatriyas by killing all the Kshatriyas 21 times! It also just did not matter how many Kshatriya women became widows due to the mass murders committed by the Brahmin Parshuram. 
 
    Should the modern Hindus still accept the extremely evil ideology of the bigoted Brahmins, which believes that the Brahmins are free to rape and kill because the Laws of Manu exempts them from being charged and punished for such crimes? Is there any sense left in the heads of those who believe in Brahminism?
 
Vedas, Upanishads, Vedangs,
Puraans are Plagiarized Works!
 
    The Brahmins publish many books and magazines, even on the internet, which are meant to serve the interests of ONLY their own caste. The Brahmins cannot have the sole right to publish their own views and still object to the other castes making their views known. The bigots among the Brahmins still wrongly believe that they have a monopoly over all the knowledge and information concerning all the Hindus.
 
    Why should the Brahmins have a monopoly over information when they are known to distort facts and falsify history on a massive scale? Even the Vedas, Upanishads, Vedangs and Puraans are highly plagiarized books that have collections or compilations of knowledge, which have been copied from the writings of Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras, Buddhists, Dravidians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Chinese, Jews, Christians, Babylonians, Mesopotamians, etc, without the writers of Vedas acknowledging all the original sources.
 
    The credit for the knowledge in the Vedas, Upanishads, Vedangs, and Puraans is given mainly to a few Rishis, Munis or the Brahmins who compiled the ancient books. The credit is not given to the thousands of original authors, scientists and mathematicians from the other castes, like the Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras of India, or from the different races and communities of other parts of the world. Can all the knowledge of the Vedas, Upanishads, Vedangs and Puraans be a monopoly of any single caste like that of the Brahmins?
 
    The worst victims of plagiarization by the Vedic writers were the Buddhist scholars, philosophers, mathematicians, medical scientists, astronomers, discoverers and other scientists. The Vedic Brahmins had cheated the Buddhist intellectuals on a massive scale in the world's largest and most glaring fraud of plagiarism. Practically, all the literary and scientific works of the ancient Buddhist intellectuals were misappropriated by the Vedic Brahmins.
 
    We should know that even the numeral 'zero' was invented during the Buddhist rule in India.
 
    The Buddhist scholars, philosophers, mathematicians and scientists were the greatest intellectuals of ancient India because the Buddhist Universities of that period were the best in the world. Students from all over the world had been coming to India to learn in the Buddhist universities.
 
    Spiritually and intellectually, Buddhism was the greatest religion of ancient times, due to which it spread to many countries of Asia. But because of the belief of Buddhists in non-violence, the Buddhist kings got defeated in the wars imposed by the extremely violent foreign invaders, who finally succeeded in destroying the benign rule of Buddhists in India. The most glorious period of the Buddhist Civilization was also thus brought to an end in India.
 
    It is not surprising that one of the greatest thinkers of modern India and the world, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, the Father of the Indian Constitution, became a Buddhist during the last part of his life. Following the example of Dr. Ambedkar, millions of low-caste Hindus have become new converts to the great religion of Buddhism. As Buddhism does not believe in the caste system, the new converts have found an easy way to escape from the evils of the caste system.
 
    The plagiarism by the Brahmins had gone unnoticed for many centuries because the Brahmins had written their books in Sanskrit, which is a language that the common Indians and foreigners had found very difficult to learn in a short time. Only the idle and parasitic Brahmins could easily spare a lot of time to learn that language. The use of Sanskrit was a very suitable means for the Brahmins to keep their act of massive plagiarism a secret for such a long period.
 
    We must also know that literally the word "Veda" can mean a "collection of knowledge" or "compilation of information." In practice, a Veda can mean a "book of knowledge." It is not necessary for the Vedas to be any sacred or divine books, which many Brahmins falsely claim. As knowledge can be good or evil, holy or unholy, the Vedas too contain some literary works that are good and also some other works that are evil. The Vedas contain prayers and praises to Gods and Goddesses, but they also contain curses and threats.
 
    Using the knowledge in the Vedas, the Brahmins can preach and practise discrimination based on the extremely evil caste system, untouchability, etc. The Brahmins are just trying to flatter their own caste, when they describe the Vedas as holy or divine books. It is the word "Divya" which means "Divine" in English. The Vedas were never named as Divya Veda, which can mean Divine Knowledge or Divine Books.
 
HAF should not Compromise on Appointment of Priests
 
    Should the dogmatic Brahmins believe that they have an absolute right to work against the interests of the majority of Hindus, Buddhists and other communities? Should all the Hindus accept the extremely evil Brahmin ideology, which is against the interests of Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Dalits? Should only the Brahmins have their own separate ideology based on their most evil caste system, which they are still propagating through their own institutions and temples by employing only the Brahmin teachers and the Brahmin priests? 
 
    Aditi Banerjee's extremely furious and vicious tirade against the Hindu American Foundation clearly indicates that the bigoted Brahmins are never going to accept the appointment of Dalit, Kshatriya and Vaishya priests in the temples under the control of Brahmins. The Forwarded Message with Aditi Banerjee's Comments on HAF's Report: "Hinduism: Not Cast in Caste" is shown below this message.
 
    The bigoted Brahmins consider all the other castes as inferior. The people of other castes should actually consider the Brahmins as inferior people because many of them are just useless and lazy parasites like the beggars, exploiters and extortionists, who still follow the perverted and primitive religious beliefs and practices of the Dark Ages of 5000 years back.
 
    The Kshatriyas and Vaishyas should be ready to learn some good things from the modern Dalit leaders who now have their own Dalit ideology, which they are spreading through Dalit teachers in Dalit schools and through Dalit priests in Dalit temples.
 
    The Kshatriyas too should follow their own Kshatriya Dharma, which they should spread through their own Kshatriya schools and Kshatriya temples, and they should employ Kshatriya teachers and Kshatriya priests for that purpose. Similarly, the Vaishyas can also follow their own Vaishya Dharma, spreading it through Vaishya schools and Vaishya temples, which should employ Vaishya teachers and Vaishya priests. Like the Dalits, the Kshatriyas and Vaishyas should recite their own prayers to their Gods and Goddesses.
 
    There shall then be no need for the Dalits, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas to deal with the bigoted Brahmin priests.
 
   Ashok  T. Jaisinghani.
    Editor & Publisher:
www.Wonder-Cures.com
www.Nutritionist-No-1.com
www.Top-Nut.com    Top Nutritionist
www.SindhiKalakar.com
  
 
_________________________
 

----- Original Message -----
From: S. Kalyanaraman
Sent: 19 Dec 2010 11:20 PM
Subject: Fwd: Comments on HAF's Report: "Hinduism: Not Cast in Caste" -- Aditi Banerjee
 

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aditi Banerjee <banerjeea@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Subject: Comments on HAF's Report: "Hinduism: Not Cast in Caste"
To: "Mihir Meghani (HAF)" <mihir@hafsite.org>
Cc: Rajiv Malhotra <rajivmalhotra2007@gmail.com>, Gautam Sen <gautam.sen@gmail.com>, "S. Kalyanaraman" <kalyan97@gmail.com>, Ram Sidhaye <indicyoga@gmail.com>, "Nagendra S. Rao (Google)" <nagendrasrao@gmail.com>
 
 
 
Dear Mihir,
 
Attached and pasted below are my personal comments on HAF's report on caste in the form of an open letter to you. I sincerely hope that you will work with others in the community to address the serious concerns raised here and elsewhere.
 
Regards,
Aditi
_______
 
Dear Mihir,
 
I'm sure that by now you've received a barrage of emails re the HAF report on caste.  I won't be redundant by repeating criticisms that have already been issued, though I am in general agreement with the serious concerns raised by Rakesh Bahadur, Rajiv Malhotra, Dr. Gautam Sen, Dr. Kalyanaraman, et al.  I did, however, want to express my personal comments on the report.
 
For the reasons given by others in their comments as well as the reasons set forth below, HAF must immediately withdraw the report and reissue it only if and when it substantially incorporates the revisions to be provided by a select group of scholars that address the community's grave concerns and objections.  There are many ways to achieve this, and surely we can find a way to structure such a process that would be satisfactory to you as well as the other concerned parties.  This is absolutely critical and urgent for the sake of the Hindu community as well as for HAF's sake, or else this may turn out to be a rift within the community that cannot be mended.
 
Here are my main objections to the report (to the extent not covered by the other comments):
 
(1) Despite being 160+ pages long, it is not at all clear what HAF's position is on the issue of caste.  There's so much CYA language going in all directions that the report ends up simultaneously saying too much and saying nothing at all. 
 
For example, the report states that it is the position of HAF that "We believe in equal religious and spiritual rights for all Hindus, including a priesthood that is open to all Hindus." (p. 56)  The report also refers to a 2006 press release by HAF, where HAF stated: "The Hindu American Foundation (HAF) welcomed [sic] the a order of the government of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu allowing all Hindus with the required training and qualification to become archakas (priests) in temples regardless of caste."
 
Does this mean you (as an advocacy group) will openly call for the government of India to interfere (even more than they are already interfering) in the internal affairs of temples to enforce some quota or other variant of affirmative action for non-Brahmin Hindus?
 
If not, are you demanding that temples themselves do this?  Are you arrogating to yourself the authority to tell temples how to conduct their internal affairs?
 
Let's leave India out of it, since you are the Hindu "American" Foundation.  Will you undertake such intervention for American temples?  Also, since the report states ad nauseum that HAF opposes birth-based discrimination, I presume as a logical matter this includes gender.  Is it HAF's official position that the "priesthood" (which is an inaccurate term since there is no institutionalized "priesthood" in Hinduism but rather various sampradayas and paramparas and mathas that have their own rules) should be open to women?  Will you call for governmental interference to ensure such measures are taken in individual temples?
 
If the answer is yes that you are going to undertake such interventions, then it is important for us to know this.  Please address where you get the mandate or authority to make such decisions on behalf of Hindu temples / sampradayas / paramparas / mathas.  (Citing the 13 statements appended to your report by various swamis does not count here as a CYA, as it is not clear that any of them had the opportunity to read your report in full before giving their statements.)
 
If the answer is no, that you are not advocating such intervention, and that the report instead is just intended as a general summary of HAF's policy position on caste and recommendations for the community and various Hindu leaders and institutions to consider, then I have one simple question which is also my next objection:
 
(2) What was the point of HAF releasing this report?  To the extent any internal reforms are urged by you to be undertaken, why not make these recommendations privately and directly to the concerned parties rather than rebuffing them publicly (other than out of a fear you wouldn't get brownie points from the US government and other secular institutions / progressive groups you appear to be cozying up to in return)?
 
To the extent any position on caste had to be taken by you as an advocacy group in the public arena, there were many different ways the same effect could have been achieved without inflicting the severe collateral damage the report has unleashed.
 
You could have simply made a one-paragraph statement like the following:
 
"We believe in the rule of law and that under law, each individual has equal dignity and must be treated equally, and therefore discrimination should be thoroughly prohibited by law (except to the extent required to undo past inequities).  We believe the internal laws of India are robust enough to prevent birth-based discrimination along the lines of caste, and to the extent there are problems enforcing the laws, that is a matter of law enforcement and we support full prosecution of the laws in ending caste discrimination.  While, in some respects, this is also a social issue, we applaud the efforts of those grassroots organizations that are working to eradicate social divisions and we will continue to support their efforts.  To that effect, we particularly acknowledge the efforts of [cite groups] to banish the ills of social divisions and discrimination.  We will work together with Hindu groups and acharyas to work towards the upliftment of the downtrodden."
 
What does your 170-page report achieve in terms of elaborating a suitable policy position that the paragraph above does not?  Why would such a paragraph not suffice for the same purpose of addressing people in debates, etc.?  Why waste 100+ pages on copying and pasting news links and random quotes from the Hindu scriptures to offer some kind of mea culpa on behalf of Hinduism that is self-serving for your purposes and to make some unilateral and arrogant demand for the "rejection" of various Hindu scriptures?  How was any of this at all required for the simple purpose of adopting a clear and appropriate policy position on caste discrimination?    Which brings me to my next and biggest objection:
 
(3) HAF does not have the authority or competence to make statements about the position of caste in Hinduism; to demand that Hindu acharyas conform their teachings to HAF's policy position; or to demand that Hindus actively reject portions of Hindu scriptures and teachings that do not conform to HAF's whitewashed, politically correct preferred version of Hinduism.
 
Had the report been confined to an argument based on civil rights or law for more measures to ensure the prevention of discrimination against lower castes, I would not object to the issuance of the report.  What I do object to is HAF claiming to definitively conclude that caste-based discrimination or birth-based hierarchy (whatever those terms mean) are not inherent to Hinduism and that to the extent any teachings or scriptures say to the contrary, such teachings and scriptures must be rejected.
 
In taking this position, HAF has crossed a line and seriously overstepped its bounds.
 
The report takes this position baldly: "HAF supports the reanalysis and subsequent rejection of any and all teachings that promote caste-based discrimination and birth-based hierarchy. … Hindu religious and spiritual leaders must take the lead in ensuring that those parts of the various scriptures that promote notions of caste-based discrimination and a birth-based hierarchy are explicitly denied any authority in the minds of their followers."
 
First of all, HAF's discussion of how caste is not inherent to Hinduism is shallow and grossly oversimplified.  Stating that everything is Brahman and therefore birth-based differences are irrelevant is a disingenuous answer.  Even the most Advaitin of Advaita Vedantins adhere to the principle that while the physical world has no fundamental reality it has transactional validity—or, as in the movie Inception, when in the dream world, the rules of the dream world are operative and have operating reality—and that when operating on the vyavaharika (mundane world) level, one has to take into account the world one encounters, the reality one sees.
 
Our rishis saw that people are not "born equal," in the sense that we come into the world with different gunas (characteristics) and aptitudes and are born into a variety of circumstances in accordance with our karma from past births.  We see this reality all the time.  We see people born into vastly different circumstances—some rich, some poor, some healthy, some gravely ill.  What our rishis recognized is that these differences are not random but rather are a product of karma accrued through past lives resulting in the current incarnation.  One way of responding to and acknowledging these self-evident differences was through the social institutions of jati and varna.
 
HAF's position that everything is Brahman and therefore no birth-based differences exist is extremely shallow and intellectually lazy. Such a position strikes at the very root of the core principles of karma and reincarnation that are foundational to Hinduism.
 
Does HAF reject the principles of karma and reincarnation when it eschews the concept of birth-based differences?
 
Acknowledging such birth-based differences is not tantamount to calling for discrimination; it is a metaphysical ontology that is fundamental to the Hindu worldview.  One can have this worldview and still agree that there should be no discrimination as a legal and social matter.  However, this worldview that takes into account differences at birth cannot be discarded just because it is inconvenient to HAF.
 
If one wants to say that there may be birth-based differences but that there should not be birth-based discrimination, that is easy enough to say without having to make all these verbal gymnastics of saying Hinduism does not believe in the relevance of birth-based differences—such a statement can in any case be contradicted in a number of places, not just in quotes from the scriptures but through the analysis of various stories from the Puranas which generally show that people are affected by nature AND nurture and that gunas inherent from birth do impact the development of an individual although are not necessarily determinative.  Perhaps such a worldview does not conform to your Westernized mindset of inherent equality, etc., but just because you don't like it, just because it may not be politically correct enough for you, does not mean you can arrogantly and unilaterally revise Hinduism to say what you wish it says.
 
Presenting a table of scriptures that tabulate what % (based on word or shloka count) talks about caste (which again is not mappable onto the scriptures as there is no equivalent word for "caste" in Sanskrit) is irrelevant and does not prove anything.  Hinduism is not a religion of the book; it is a religion based on traditions transmitted through sampradayas and paramparas that are in conformity with the scriptures but not confined to them.  Thus, such a verse-counting analysis is shallow and misleading at best.  Nor is it at all necessary as the ills of caste-based discrimination can be wholly addressed through legal means and social reform without getting into these thorny issues.
 
I could live with all of the above had HAF not made the brash and unforgivable and totally unacceptable demand that certain portions of our scriptures must be rejected by our acharyas and by the Hindu community. That is a fundamental attack on Hinduism, no less an attack just because it happens to come from a "Hindu" organization.
 
It is true, as HAF states, that the Smritis "by their very nature and intent, are recognized to change with space and time and do not necessarily teach Hinduism's eternal spiritual truths." (p. 1).  However, that does not mean one can cherry-pick among the texts to pick out verses they like and call them the real Hinduism and discard the others. Such reinterpretations are the province of spiritual giants such as Veda Vyasa, Adi Shankara, etc., who have the spiritual advancement and tapobala to institute such evolutions within Hinduism. It is not a grant of license for political organizations to selectively cherry-pick their favorite bits of our scriptures.
 
As described above, HAF has called for the rejection of any part of a scripture that promote notions of birth-based hierarchy.  Again, it is not at all clear what constitutes birth-based hierarchy in HAF's mind.  Per Vishal's analysis, at least some verses of various Vedas discuss some notion of caste.  Is it HAF's view that such portions of the Vedas are to be rejected by Hindus?  Is HAF asking Hindu acharyas to reject Vedic shlokas, which are the very fountainhead, the most sacrosanct of the sacrosanct sources of Hindu dharma?
 
HAF cavalierly dismisses and denigrates the Manu Smrti, casually saying that since no one reads it anyway, it's irrelevant and therefore can be safely dropped and dismissed.  Presumably, HAF's call to reject scriptures advocating for "birth-based hierarchy" would entail rejection of the Manu Smriti and other Dharmashastras. 
 
I will not reject the Manu Smriti and I will not reject any portion of Hinduism's sacred scriptures, whether Shruti or Smriti, just because it is not in conformity with HAF's policy position.  All of Hinduism's scriptures are revered and venerated and sacrosanct.  They are not dead texts to be surgically carved up with unfavored parts to be exorcised at whim.
 
In its arrogance, HAF has denigrated the faith of a billion people.  It is not necessary to read the Manu Smriti to have faith and reverence in it.  Being a Hindu is not a textual exercise—it is shraddha in our traditions, in our scriptures, in our rishis and forefathers through the ages. Hinduism hasn't survived because of intellectual analyses.  Hinduism has survived because of the faith of its people, the reverence of the masses for our scriptures, our rishis, our pantheon of devas and devis.  HAF is trampling on the faith of traditional Hindus by brashly demanding that acharyas reject portions of the scriptures that HAF dislikes.
 
I will tell you who Manu is to me.  He is our first law-giver; he is our first forefather; he and his descendants are the rulers of our universe.  Every morning, when I sit for puja, I invoke the rishis and the forefathers, and I feel his presence in my shrine room among all the other great sages and rishis and divine beings who line the corridors of the Hindu pantheon.  I have bowed before him in remote temples in the Himalayas, and I have felt his blessings fall upon me.
 
Perhaps for HAF the Manu Smriti is just an old book, Manu just an old dead guy.  But for me, and for millions of others, the Manus, the rishis who gave us our scriptures, and the scriptures themselves, are living manifestations of the Divine.  They are accepted as Divine, and we have abiding faith in their wisdom, in their divinity, in the blessings conferred by them.  We will not turn our backs on them or on any part of them.
 
Anyone who attacks Manu attacks Hinduism.  We fought against Doniger for attacking Rama and the Ramayana.  I will fight anyone who attacks Manu or the Manu Smriti and calls for them to be exorcised from Hinduism.  This does not mean that the words of Manu Smriti are to be applied literally; but it also does not mean that the Manu Smriti is to be rejected.  There is a fine line between the two.
 
HAF has overstepped its bounds grossly, and if it persists in calling for the rejection of portions of Hindu scriptures, then it can no longer present itself as a Hindu advocacy group that speaks for Hindus or presents a Hindu voice.  It is acting no differently than Doniger and others of her ilk who have also grossly distorted Hinduism to suit their own proclivities.
 
Many of us opposed Doniger when she attacked Hinduism; I have no hesitation in opposing HAF when it attacks the Dharmashastras and the Hindu dharma by maligning Manu, who was our first law-giver and the forefather of all humans and all Hindus, and various of our Hindu scriptures.  We must have conviction in our own dharma.  I will not apologize for our Shruti and our Smritis.  I will not apologize for Manu.  Let us live by the rule of law, certainly; let us not practice discrimination.  But I will not reject a single word of our scriptures.       
 
The issue here is bigger than one report about caste.  It is about the soul of HAF.  What does HAF stand for?  Will it be an organization that stands for Hinduism and Hindus, or will it make the compromises it must to advance its own interests and to curry favor with the political and media mainstream?  If HAF is willing to throw away parts of our scriptures to suit its purposes, what else that is Hindu will be discarded to suit HAF's convenience?  Where does the line get drawn?  This is just one report on caste—but what will come next?
 
HAF with the issuance of this report has sadly pitted different factions of the Hindu community against each other.  In this, you have shamefully divided the Hindu community.   Not because anyone advocates caste-based discrimination but because the report has been so clumsily put together, so damning in the inconsistent and ill-defined positions adopted and the reasoning used, so politically lethal to the interests of Hindus here and abroad, that people are being forced to take an opposing stand in order to mitigate the damage to the causes dear to our hearts.
 
If HAF is willing to work with the community, the damage can be somewhat rectified.  But if HAF turns its back on the community, then we will have to turn our backs on you forcefully and explicitly.
 
As Rakeshji said in his email, it is hurtful to have to turn against one's own people.  We would all prefer to instead work together.  But dharma is bigger than any individual or any organization.   If HAF persists in distorting Hinduism and calling for the exorcism of certain portions of Hindu scriptures that you find inconvenient, then you are standing for adharma, notwithstanding the fact that you all may be Hindus by birth or self-identification.  Dharma is bigger than any individual or organization.  If, for the sake of dharma, HAF must fall, then so be it.
 
This is not a passing storm that will subside when tempers cool.  Be assured that if you persist in this way, many of us stand ready to ensure that your funding is cut and that your ability to inflict such damage on the Hindu cause in the future is severely curtailed.
 
                                                                               Sincerely,
 
                                                                            Aditi Banerjee              
                                                     
 
 
 



--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/

No comments:

Post a Comment