Caste System and Status of Women in Hinduism

[santdasji]

No no debate. Bhagwan is Bhagwan and we are to love Him and worship Him thats that. We are the soul. Become one with Brahm and worship Parbrahm.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

We find that Mother worship was a big part of the Indus civilization. (3rd millennium BC ) The female figurines that were dug up at Mohenjo-dero are just like the ones found in many Eurasian archaeological sites. (ie Mesopotamia, Balkans, Crete ect. ) I think we can assume that this belief system came from a religious set of ideas shared by people all over Asia and Europe with different names and forms of our Goddess. This belief system today is still prevalent in Hinduism. Lets look at part of the Durga Sukta of the Vedas.

In this passage the Goddess is thought of as Agni.

I take refuge in the Goddess Durga, fiery in her luster and radiant ardency, who is the power of the supreme manifest in diverse forms, residing in actions and there results.

Again this modern faith that can be traced back to the neolithic , and it still has a place in its structure for the women and the Divine Feminine.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Oh dear. Are we getting into a dvaita vs advaita debate here?
I fear no good will come of this.....

You are right about this one.

 

[bansal2008]

One of the things most misconstrued about Hinduism is that it's a male-dominated religion. It is not.

In religious matters, Hindus have elevated women to the level of divinity.

In Dharma, only words for strength and power are feminine -- "shakti'' means "power'' and "strength.'' All male power comes from the feminine. The Trimurti (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva) are all powerless without their female counterparts. It seems then, in Sanatan Dharma, women holds a position, that is infact, superior to men.
In Vedas, women and men were equal as far as education and religion was concerned. Women also participated in the public sacrifices alongside men. The Rig Veda also refers to women engaged in warfare. One queen Bispala is mentioned, and even as late a witness as Megasthenes (fifth century B.C. E.) mentions heavily armed women guards protecting Chandragupta's palace.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

To understand the position of women in Hinduism, one must understand the true essence of Hindu scriptures and be able to discriminate between what is religious philosophy (Sanatana Dharma) versus what was merely social philosophy (Yuga Dharma) in the ancient times. The social philosophy varies with time, but the religious ideals do not.

some verses.

“Women should be nurtured with every, tenderness and attention by their fathers, their brothers, their husband, and their brother-in-law, if they desire great prosperity.”

“Where women live in affliction, the family soon becomes extinct, but when they are loved and respected, and cherished with tenderness, the family grows and prospers in all circumstances.”

Striyah devah, Striyah pranah "Women are Devas, women are life itself."

Several hymns of the Rig Veda were composed by female Rishis (sages). Young ladies of the time had a voice in their marriage. "the woman who is of gentle birth and of graceful form," so runs a verse in the Rig Veda, "selects among many of her loved one as her husband." Numerous case of Svayamvara, that is, of ladies selecting their own husbands, are mentioned in the Mahabharata and other works. There is sufficient evidence to show, that widow marriage was allowed, and that the right of Sati was unknown in the Vedic period.

"Rise up woman," so runs a text of the Rig Veda (X, 18.8) "thou art lying by one whose life is gone, come to the world of the living, away from thy husband, and become the wife of him who holds thy hand and is willing to marry thee."

this verse is clearly telling the widowed woman to come back from her dead husband and remarry!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shakti is the fundamental strength of the feminine that infuses all life and is viewed as a DEVI. Shakti is the divine feminine power found in everything.
Women as a child is called Kanya (Devi Durga), as a wife- she is patni (saha Dharma charini, i.e. a partner in her husband's religious duties and as a mother, she is worthy of worship (matro devo bavah)..

I could go on..but this should be enough to know the importance of women in Sanatan Dharma.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
OM

 

[Valjean]

Sure, you can make a case for sexul equality with abstract theology. You could make a case for male domination as well.

Theory and theology are all well and good, but they usually bear little resemblance to sociological reality. Traditional Indian society is male-dominated. In fact, in many regions women weren't independent social entities at all, but houshold items owned by a husband. They had no social place, legal rights or standing outside of marriage. Women's social non-existence was sometimes so egregious that a widow was tossed onto the funeral pyre of her dead husband as useless trash.

 

[santdasji]

To understand the position of women in Hinduism, one must understand the true essence of Hindu scriptures and be able to discriminate between what is religious philosophy (Sanatana Dharma) versus what was merely social philosophy (Yuga Dharma) in the ancient times. The social philosophy varies with time, but the religious ideals do not.

some verses.

“Women should be nurtured with every, tenderness and attention by their fathers, their brothers, their husband, and their brother-in-law, if they desire great prosperity.”

“Where women live in affliction, the family soon becomes extinct, but when they are loved and respected, and cherished with tenderness, the family grows and prospers in all circumstances.”

Striyah devah, Striyah pranah "Women are Devas, women are life itself."

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Sure, you can make a case for sexul equality with abstract theology. You could make a case for male domination as well.

This is true, but since the older scriptures are more feminist in nature we should use them as our guide.

Traditional Indian society is male-dominated.

Not all of it, India and Nepal are made up of many cultures. Some of my friends are from Kerala they come from almost a matriarchal culture. Hinduism is the only religion that it texts can be clearly traced back to a time when some cultures that were more egalitarian.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Theory and theology are all well and good, but they usually bear little resemblance to sociological reality.

This is a good point let me explain the objective of religion at least from my point of view.

To be a follower of any school of the Dharma Philosophy is to seek after Truth and the freedom from maya that comes with it. The ideal is to transcend our sociological realities. To create harmony in our lives with the truth so every breath we take creates less suffering for all beings around us. Yes the sociological reality is very bleak in many ways. It is by the exercise of transcendence that we can create a higher state of consciousness in our selves and shed light on the sociological reality so we can all have a better existence.

From my way of thinking. The scriptures are a finger pointing to a way out from the suffering that all cultures create for there people, because cultures are made up of people who suffer.

 

[bansal2008]

Sure, you can make a case for sexul equality with abstract theology. You could make a case for male domination as well.

Theory and theology are all well and good, but they usually bear little resemblance to sociological reality. Traditional Indian society is male-dominated. In fact, in many regions women weren't independent social entities at all, but houshold items owned by a husband. They had no social place, legal rights or standing outside of marriage. Women's social non-existence was sometimes so egregious that a widow was tossed onto the funeral pyre of her dead husband as useless trash.

Rig veda clearly tells the widow to come back from her dead husband and get remarried. All this Sati thing has no relation with Sanatan Dharma

 

[bansal2008]

SANATANA DHARMA VS YUGA DHARMA

To understand Hinduism, one must understand the true essence of Hindu scriptures and be able to discriminate between what is religious philosophy ( Sanatan Dharma) versus what was merely social philosophy (Yuga Dharma) in the ancient times. The social philosophy varies with time, but the religious ideals do not. This point is critical since Hinduism has a large number of scriptures and lack of right understanding as to their content and hierarchy can result in distortion of the Hindu religious tradition.

Hindu scriptures Are generally classified into two categories: Sruti (primary scriptures) and Smriti (secondary scriptures). Sruti in Sanskrit means "that which is heard." Thus the Sruti scriptures are the eternal truths that the Vedic seers, called rishis, are said to have heard in their deep meditations. These scriptures are not considered the works of the human mind, but an expression of what has been realized through intuitive perception. This category includes Vedas, Upanishads, Brahmasutra and the Bhagavad Gita. The Sruti scriptures are the primary scriptures of Hinduism and, as such, hold the highest authority.

Smriti in Sanskrit means "that which is remembered." Smriti scriptures are considered to be of human origin and include a large number of religious writings, such as Ramayana, Mahabharatta, Puranas, Manu Smriti, and Dharma Shastras. Smriti scriptures are the secondary scriptures of Hinduism and are subordinate to the Sruti scriptures

 

[bansal2008]

Sure, you can make a case for sexul equality with abstract theology. You could make a case for male domination as well.

Theory and theology are all well and good, but they usually bear little resemblance to sociological reality. Traditional Indian society is male-dominated. In fact, in many regions women weren't independent social entities at all, but houshold items owned by a husband. They had no social place, legal rights or standing outside of marriage. Women's social non-existence was sometimes so egregious that a widow was tossed onto the funeral pyre of her dead husband as useless trash.

Always keep religious philosophy separate from social philosophy.

Sanatana Dharma is enternal whereas Yuga Dharama varies from time to time.

All male-domination, discrimination towards women etc. has no relation to Sanatan Dharma.

 

[Valjean]

Agreed. I was describing the actual society of those claiming to follow the Sanatana Dharma.
Sanatana Dharma as interpreted abstractly by theologians is a horse of a different colour.

 

[SoundBrain]

Hi everyone. I am considering converting to Hinduism. However, I have a couple of problems. The problems are with the caste system and with the status of women in Hinduism. I was hoping someone could clear up my misconceptions and help me to understand Hinduism from a more positive point of view. Is the caste system still a part of the Hindu religion? What about the status of women? Do women hold a low status in Hinduism? Please help me out.

Well.. I became an Atheist from being a Hindu.

If someone tells you that the casteism is fast fading, that can either be taken as the joke of this century or just another rumor to keep Hinduism from fading. I would suggest you to read this post in another thread to know a little about history of Hinduism. atheism2 > A religion that is not bad > my post!

Actions against casteism are taken in a very few states like Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, but still it cannot be completely taken care of. Its because, politics in most parts of India are all based on religion.

I would really like to hear from people from other parts of India about the actions taken against casteism.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Well.. I became an Atheist from being a Hindu.

I am glad you found your way. I was a Christian then an Agnostic then I became a Hindu.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Well.. I became an Atheist from being a Hindu.

If someone tells you that the casteism is fast fading, that can either be taken as the joke of this century or just another rumor to keep Hinduism from fading. I would suggest you to read this post in another thread to know a little about history of Hinduism. atheism2 > A religion that is not bad > my post!

I think your post is wrong when it comes to Hindu and Buddhist history. In fact at one point the BBC has called the Idea that Aryans came to India in large numbers as racist. This idea came from a time when white men could not believe that a brown man came up with such advanced ideas.

Even the Dali Lama sees Hinduism and Buddhism as brother and sister religions. I do like your worries about casteism today. You also most see that It has taken America 200 years to deal with racism in our country. India is still young as an independent state.

Many well known Atheist like Sam Harris and Carl Sagan had a positive view of Hinduism. Maybe because Hindu's are the first ones who came up with the idea of Atheism in 600 bc.

I also believe that the Lord Buddha did not say anything that could not be found already in the Vedas.

 

[SoundBrain]

I definitely understand that using words like Dravidians and Aryans sound racial. I feel bad about that too. But all we try to do are countermeasures. You have to know how racial the actions and words of aryans are. For example, I will recommend a book named : 'Aryans, Jews, Brahmins : theorizing authority through myths of identity' by Dorothy M. Figueira. If you happen to read this book, you will know what I am talking about.

Also there are a lot of books like 'The Dravidian Languages' by Krishnamurthi, which will tell you how many words have been borrowed from Tamil into Sanskrit. But the north Indian schools and colleges teach history the otherwise. If aryans are that brilliant why do they manipulate the history for their own good.

Even the facts about Dravidians in 'Indus Valley Civilization' have been completely messed up. Indus valley time period is rightfully called 'Pre-Aryan era'. You can easily check these info in wikipedia. I am writing an article on 'Dravidians', so I am collecting huge amount of data.

About BBC, I don't believe a word from a british media. British are the culprits who did unrepairable damage to wherever they went. They were the ones who encouraged casteism by claiming themselves to be Aryans and siding with the fake Aryans of India( 'Aryans' of India are not approved by the real 'Aryans' in Iran - Land of Aryans), which is a part of 'divide and rule' policy. This formula has been successfully used by them in most of their colonies. South Africa is one of them, where the Africans, Indians, Colored ( SAs call the cross of Africans and Europeans by this word) and themselves are kept separately in distinction to allow easier domination by skin color.

Coming to the point:
I believe in ABSOLUTE EQUALITY among human beings. This was one of the primary reasons why I left Hinduism. If your so-called God does nothing but sit and watch all the 2500 years of atrocities due to casteism, then I will protest against him. Even if the Dravidians do this mistake I will protest against them.

Thanks for the calm, mature reply. I was expecting a hot-headed debate here. Lets continue this conversation as you see any doubts in my argument.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Klaus K. Klosstermair the distinguished Professor who wrote the most used college text book in the English speaking world. A Survey of Hinduism. Said this about the Aryan Invasion.


A recent major work offers 'seventeen arguments: why the Aryan invasion never happened'.6 It may be worthwhile summarising and analysing them briefly:

1. The Aryan invasion model is largely based on linguistic conjectures which are unjustified (and wrong). Languages develop much more slowly than assumed by nineteenth century scholars. According to Renfrew speakers of Indo-European languages may have lived in Anatolia as early as 7000 BCE
2. The supposed large-scale migrations of Aryan people in the second millennium BCE first into Western Asia and then into northern India (by 1500 BCE) cannot be maintained in view of the fact that the Hittites were in Anatolia already by 2200 BCE and the Kassites and Mitanni had kings and dynasties by 1600 BCE
3. There is no memory of an invasion or of large-scale migration in the records of Ancient India-neither in the Vedas, Buddhist or Jain writings, nor in Tamil literature. The fauna and flora, the geography and the climate described in the Rigveda are that of Northern India.
4. There is a striking cultural continuity between the archaeological artefacts of the Indus-Saraswati civilisation and subsequent Indian society and culture: a continuity of religious ideas, arts, crafts, architecture, system of weights and measures.
5. The archaeological finds of Mehrgarh (copper, cattle, barley) reveal a culture similar to that of the Vedic Indians. Contrary to former interpretations, the Rigveda shows not a nomadic but an urban culture (purusa as derived from pur vasa = town-dweller).
6. The Aryan invasion theory was based on the assumption that a nomadic people in possession of horses and chariots defeated an urban civilisation that did not know horses, and that horses are depicted only from the middle of the second millennium onwards. Meanwhile archaeological evidence for horses has been found in Harappan and pre-Harappan sites; drawings of horses have been found in paleolithic caves in India; drawings of riders on horses dated c. 4300 BCE have been found in Ukraina. Horsedrawn war chariots are not typical for nomadic breeders but for urban civilisations.
7. The racial diversity found in skeletons in the cities of the Indus civilisation is the same as in India today; there is no evidence of the coming of a new race.
8. The Rigveda describes a river system in North India that is pre-1900 BCE in the case of the Saraswati river, and pre-2600 BCE in the case of the Drishadvati river. Vedic literature shows a population shift from the Saraswati (Rigveda) to the Ganges (Brahmanas and Puranas), also evidenced by archaeological finds.
9. The astronomical references in the Rigveda are based on a Pleiades-Krittika (Taurean) calendar of c. 2500 BCE when Vedic astronomy and mathematics were well-developed sciences (again, not a feature of a nomadic people).
10. The Indus cities were not destroyed by invaders but deserted by their inhabitants because of desertification of the area. Strabo (Geography XV.1.19) reports that Aristobulos had seen thousands of villages and towns deserted because the Indus had changed its course.
11. The battles described in the Rigveda were not fought between invaders and natives but between people belonging to the same culture.
12. Excavations in Dwaraka have lead to the discovery of a site larger than Mohenjodaro, dated c. 1500 BCE with architectural structures, use of iron, a script halfway between Harappan and Brahmi. Dwarka has been associated with Krishna and the end of the Vedic period.
13. A continuity in the morphology of scripts: Harappan, Brahmi, Devanagari.
14. Vedic ayas, formerly translated as 'iron,' probably meant copper or bronze. Iron was found in India before 1500 BCE in Kashmir and Dwaraka.
15. The Puranic dynastic lists with over 120 kings in one Vedic dynasty alone, fit well into the 'new chronology'. They date back to the third millennium BCE Greek accounts tell of Indian royal lists going back to the seventh millennium BCE.
16. The Rigveda itself shows an advanced and sophisticated culture, the product of a long development, 'a civilisation that could not have been delivered to India on horseback' (p.160).
17. Painted Gray Ware culture in the western Gangetic plains, dated ca 1100 BCE has been found connected to (earlier) Black and Red Ware etc.

From the book a short History of Hinduism.


20 years ago the Aryan invasion was a given with western thinkers. Today the winds of change are blowing. If you look at the facts you will see that it is no longer seen as a fact.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Coming to the point:
I believe in ABSOLUTE EQUALITY among human beings.

So do I in fact I have spent my life working for the equality of all people. This is not an empty idea that I give lip service to. I have work hard for these ideas. If you would like I could show you from the Vedas that the early caste system was flexable and not by birth. I will also show you proof of different sects of Hinduism who never believed in this system.In fact the Temple priests in many Tantric Temples have always been from low caste people. Both of the sects I have studyed and followed never believed in the caste system.

This is not to make you believe in Hinduism you have no need to believe in anything. Who am I to tell you what to believe.

 

[Andal]

I definitely understand that using words like Dravidians and Aryans sound racial. I feel bad about that too. But all we try to do are countermeasures. You have to know how racial the actions and words of aryans are. For example, I will recommend a book named : 'Aryans, Jews, Brahmins : theorizing authority through myths of identity' by Dorothy M. Figueira. If you happen to read this book, you will know what I am talking about.

Also there are a lot of books like 'The Dravidian Languages' by Krishnamurthi, which will tell you how many words have been borrowed from Tamil into Sanskrit. But the north Indian schools and colleges teach history the otherwise. If aryans are that brilliant why do they manipulate the history for their own good.

Even the facts about Dravidians in 'Indus Valley Civilization' have been completely messed up. Indus valley time period is rightfully called 'Pre-Aryan era'. You can easily check these info in wikipedia. I am writing an article on 'Dravidians', so I am collecting huge amount of data.

About BBC, I don't believe a word from a british media. British are the culprits who did unrepairable damage to wherever they went. They were the ones who encouraged casteism by claiming themselves to be Aryans and siding with the fake Aryans of India( 'Aryans' of India are not approved by the real 'Aryans' in Iran - Land of Aryans), which is a part of 'divide and rule' policy. This formula has been successfully used by them in most of their colonies. South Africa is one of them, where the Africans, Indians, Colored ( SAs call the cross of Africans and Europeans by this word) and themselves are kept separately in distinction to allow easier domination by skin color.

Coming to the point:
I believe in ABSOLUTE EQUALITY among human beings. This was one of the primary reasons why I left Hinduism. If your so-called God does nothing but sit and watch all the 2500 years of atrocities due to casteism, then I will protest against him. Even if the Dravidians do this mistake I will protest against them.

Thanks for the calm, mature reply. I was expecting a hot-headed debate here. Lets continue this conversation as you see any doubts in my argument.

Namaste,

As a scholar I disagree with your thoughts about Aryans vs. Dravidians. If you do more reading you will find the academic community tends to be split on this issue. For every pro AIT person you find you will also find an anti AIT person. Ultimately it is up to the individual to decide what arguement they believe.

In terms of equality I absolutely agree. Men and women of all castes should be equal. The caste system as it has been practiced is in many regards morally wrong. I have no problem with varna that is based on personal inclination and ability, I do however have a huge problem with birth based caste and discrimination against women. We have the ability to help change this. You see it starting slowly in India with, for example, programs teaching women to be temple pujaris and temples abolishing caste requirements. These steps, although small, are in the right direction.

The problem too is that the gov. made the caste system illegal but then they developed scheduled castes for special governemnt treatment thus perpectuating the problem.

As for God's involvement, this is Kali Yuga, once the balance is shifted completely toward evil and dharma is on the verge of completely dying, he will return again and set it right. It's the natural order of things. If you're atheist I don't expect you to accept this answer but I'm just providing my pov.

 

[SoundBrain]

First I would say that all the claims by Dr.Klaus K. Klosstermair are assumptions (I accept that it is the case for almost all of ancient history). And I can present a hundred more references for my claims too. I will never trust anything from a single researcher. Also, thanks, for now I know who started the claim that all Indians are Aryans.

His assumptions, particularly the first one that languages develop slowly than expected, is untrue. As for Malayalam, it is considered to be the daughter of Middle Tamil around 6th century. But Malayalam literature started appearing as soon as 9th century, which is almost the case with many other Dravidian languages.
Also, the claim that there is no particular records available about foreign invasion does not make sense. The most ancient Dravidian book available is Tholkkappiyam from around 2nd cen BC. There is no way of knowing what happened before that. Also the Tamil literature from around 1st cen AD talks about the Tamil kings who waged war against the northeners(Aryans) for not speaking Tamil.

And your claim clearly defies the existence of Dravidians, which is a complete absurdity. There is even a clear line between Dravidian and Aryan Gods in Hinduism. AND for your

Wikipedia:
Dravidian people also Dravidians refers to the people that natively speak languages belonging to the Dravidian language family. Populations of speakers are found mostly in southern India. Other Dravidian people are found in parts of central India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. Some scholars hold that the Dravidian people were the originators of the Indus Valley Civilization. Dravidian people with the most speakers include Tamils, Telugus, Kannadigas, Malayalis, Gonds and Tuluvas.

The English word Dravidian was first employed by Robert Caldwell in his book of comparative Dravidian grammar based on the usage of the Sanskrit word drāvida in the work Tantravārttika by Kumārila Bhaṭṭa (Zvelebil 1990:xx). Caldwell coined the term "Dravidian" from the Sanskrit drāvida, which was used in a 7th-century text to refer to the Tamil language of the south of India. The publication of the Dravidian etymological dictionary by T. Burrow and M. B. Emeneau was a landmark event in Dravidian linguistics.
As for the origin of the Sanskrit word drāviḍa, there have been various theories proposed. Basically the theories are about the direction of derivation between tamiẓ and drāviḍa. That is to say, while linguists such as Zvelebil assert that the direction is tamiẓ >drāviḍa (ibid. page xxi), others state that the name Dravida also forms the root of the word Tamil (Dravida -> Dramila -> Tamizha or Tamil).

Main articles: Aryan Invasion Theory (history and controversies) and Dravidian movement
Some Indians believe that the British Raj exaggerated differences between northern and southern Indians beyond linguistic differences to help sustain their control of India. The British Raj ended in 1947, yet all discussion of Aryan or Dravidian "races" remains highly controversial in India. It is now widely believed that the British used this only as their "Divide and rule" blueprint for taking over the region.

Finally don't mistake me for taking the racial terms such as Dravidians & Aryans again. But all we are trying to do is counteract. I will never accept the superiority of anyone. I would never even say Dravidians are superior than anyone. But trying to suppress someone who is equally or more civilized is not the work of any good being.