non-caste denomination hinduism?

[Wannabe Yogi]

A few more Brahmins who were born to a low caste:

-The story in the Mahabhrata of MATANGA. He was a man who was brought up as a Brahman but was the son of a Chandala.

-Aitareya Rishi was son of a low caste person who was a Daasa or criminal but became a Brahmin wrote Aitareya Brahman and Aitareyopanishad.

-Valmiki came from a tribal family.

The list goes on and on.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Hi Wannabe
I didn't know about the female order, the Sarada Math. I am pleased to know that.
I pick up in the slight promotion of the monastical approach in their more open publications (i.e. not strict translation of scriptures). I find that Sri Adi Shankaracharya took the approach also that realisation would imply that man may renunciate his weath and family and wander, living on alms alone. Personally my view is different, as in post 14 above, as I feel that it is all the will of the Lord, even if the desire to be a householder is considered unnecessary, the role may still continue for the "body-mind" of the realised soul.

Ramakrishna was both a monk and a Householder at the sametime.

 

[Breathe]

Ramakrishna was both a monk and a Householder at the sametime.

May I ask how that would work?

 

[kaisersose]

A few more Brahmins who were born to a low caste:

-The story in the Mahabhrata of MATANGA. He was a man who was brought up as a Brahman but was the son of a Chandala.

-Aitareya Rishi was son of a low caste person who was a Daasa or criminal but became a Brahmin wrote Aitareya Brahman and Aitareyopanishad.

-Valmiki came from a tribal family.

The list goes on and on.

The list does not go on and on. Now I have aroused suspicion in some of the regulars here that I may perhaps not be a Hindu and am just a rabble rouser. Mindful of the sentiments here, I will keep it short.

Brahmanas have to have patrilineal lineage all the way upto one of the eight Rishis. Easy to verify this by talking to anyone from a traditional Matha in India. Now there are a few exceptions like Vishwamitra, Matanga, etc., who did not have Brahmana gotras and had to earn the status. Their stories are very clear that they had to undergo superhuman efforts (overcoming Indra, etc) to get there, which is why the list is really short. It is certainly far from the Hare Krishna system where their Gurus have told them all Hare Krishnas are Brahmanas (Their founder Prabhupada also said on several occasions that Hare Krishnas are not Hindus).

Shankara the founder of the Advaita Vedanta in his Upadesha Sahasri, is very clear that the first thing the Guru does is to check the student's qualifications, including his Gotra. The very first question to Jabala by his Guru was about his lineage. When he did not know it, but was upfront, his Guru decided that he must be a Brahmana because he spoke the truth. All haridasas, including Kanakadasa, though great devotees were never considered Brahmanas at any time. Now this list can be elaborated.

There may be other definitions of a Brahmana floating around - mostly neo-age definitions, created in the last hundred years or so - but this is the way it has been in India for centuries. Don't take my word for it and check for yourself. A Brahmana without a Gotra and Pravara is not a Brahmana per any of the traditional Brahmana Mathas in India. Of course, people who feel they know better are free to disagree with them.

Brahmin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia provides some detail, but nothing like talking to a Matha affiliate.

And I am done with this topic!

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Now I have aroused suspicion in some of the regulars here that I may perhaps not be a Hindu and am just a rabble rouser.

May I guess at what you believes? If it's not to personal tell me if I am correct. Answer only if it provides you personal entertainment. If I am completely off base feel free to tell me if I am all wet. I am not good at reading people by their posts. I am more a body language guy.

I see you just what to say you are. A Materialist who is a Hindu. Who interprets hinduism in light of how it's practiced today. By the average man on the street. You have a good knowledge base of Hinduism but sees life with the eye of a secular indian.

You are a rabble rouser but muck rakers have their place. We all need them to help expose injustice.

 

[Riverwolf]

Brahmanas have to have patrilineal lineage all the way upto one of the eight Rishis. Easy to verify this by talking to anyone from a traditional Matha in India.

I know you won't see this, but I do have to wonder how many you've actually talked to. In order for your claims to have weight, you will have to have talked to most of the affiliates of every traditional Mathas. A single affiliate of a single traditional Matha isn't enough.

 

[Satsangi]

Friend Kaisersose,

It is NOT ONLY the Brahmins who have a Gotra; other Varnas too can have a Gotra. In fact, Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya and he not only became a Brahmin, but a BrahmaRishi and a Gotra by the name of Vishwamitra is prevalent today too. When you sit for a Puja, the priest often asks for a Gotra and if you do not know yours, "Vishnu" Gotra is assigned to you. The same Wi-Ki that you quoted says it, although I am not much of a fan of Wi-Ki.

Gotra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of gotras - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In today's world, if you write your name it usually has three things- first name, middle name and last name. In the same way, the introduction of a person in ancient India was by an elaborate system which includes the Gotra, pravara etc. But, the purpose was introduction only and not discrimination. Satyakam Jabali possessed basic qualifications like truthfulness and hence was taught BrahmVidya inspite of his Gotra not known. If the purpose was to discriminate him, then the Guru would have thrown him out.

A scientific use of Gotra has been prevalent from ancient times- one is not supposed to marry in the same Gotra; this is genetically a good thing.

Regards,

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

non-caste denomination hinduism?

Dharma has nothing to do with caste, creed, colour, DNA etc.
They [caste system] was used for management of society which finally became mismanaged to the extent that only politicians find use for it and the uneducated class follow suit.
In today's modern Indian society no one discusses such subjects like religion or caste even language what everyone discusses is what the other is doing [profession] how they keep fit, how they enjoy life etc.
For this to get translated to the whole Indian society even in the villages will still take time till our politicians [leaders] do not transcend their own desires of power and wealth.

Love & rgds

 

[TatTvamAsi]

There is no Hinduism without caste (varna). Jati is wholly separate and during the course of events of history they became intertwined in Indian society; much to the detriment of the "lower" castes (whatever that means).

Yet, Varnashrama Dharma is the backbone of Hinduism. Even Gandhi supported it! :yes:

Casteism should be done away with, however.

 

[TTCUSM]

The list does not go on and on.

Kaiserose,

Have you actually read the Vedas?
Book 9, Hymn 112 of the Rig Veda:

1. WE all have various thoughts and plans, and diverse are the ways of men.
The Brahman seeks the worshipper, wright seeks the cracked, and leech the maimed. Flow, Indu, flow for Indra's sake.
2 The smith with ripe and seasoned plants, with feathers of the birds of air,
With stones, and with enkindled flames, seeks him who hath a store of gold. Flow, Indu, flow for Indra's sake.
3 A bard am I, my dad's a leech, mammy lays corn upon the stones.
Striving for wealth, with varied plans, we follow our desires like kine. Flow, Indu, flow for Indra's sake.

This implies that during the Vedic period, varna was not hereditary, and there was no prohibition between inter-varna marriages.
Book 26, Verse 2 of the Yajur-Veda:

That I to all the people may address this salutary speech,
To priest and nobleman, Sûdra and Arya, to one of our own
kin and to the stranger.

This implies that Hindus of all varnas were allowed to hear the Vedas.

 

[Cypress]

Can please someone clarify the difference between varna and jati?

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

The four varnas

The system of four varnas is also mentioned in Bhagavad-Gita 4.13:
cātur-varṇyaḿ mayā sṛṣṭaḿ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ |
tasya kartāram api māḿ viddhy akartāram avyayam ||
"The four orders of society were created by Me [Krishna] classifying them according to the mode of Prakrti predominant in each and apportioning corresponding duties to them; though the author of this creation, know Me, the immortal Lord, to be a non-doer." [3]

Personal understanding from the above that it was only for classification or understanding as to where an individual fits with nature. Each individual has to take a suitable path towards merging and since merging or harmonizing with existence is what life is all about if one knows/understands where he best fits with existence, it becomes easier.
It was no way to DIVIDE the society. Religion has only to do with UNITING and not DIVIDING!

Love & rgds

 

[Breathe]

Can please someone clarify the difference between varna and jati?

Varna is one's caste, which Hindus I've spoken to believe is determined by our aptitude, skills, and so on, as opposed to being something which is placed on another by his or her birth.
Jati is one's birth, and is seen by many as a corruption of the varna system.

Sadly, people often mistake the varna system for the jati system.

Rig Veda 9.112.3

कारुरहं ततो भिषगुपलप्रक्षिणी नना | ||
kārurahaṃ tato bhiṣaghupalaprakṣiṇī nanā |
"I am a bard, my father is a physician, my mother's job is to grind the corn." ​

 

[kaisersose]

Can please someone clarify the difference between varna and jati?

Varna is the simpler, textbook four-fold classification as Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya & Shudra.

Jaati is the actual, real life version of Varna. There are countless Jaatis, and they rank themselves and other Jaatis, higher or lower.

For example, Brahmanas classify themselves into several groups and sub-groups. Until the last century, these sub groups were pretty closed and cross-group marriages were not allowed. Similar grouping systems exist among all Hindus.

The english word caste is used for both Jaati and Varna.

 

[nameless]

Jaati is the actual, real life version of Varna.

It is true that jaati is decided by birth; but it is something cultural and not religious, for jaati to be real life version of varna, varna should also be related to birth, but it is not. Your opinion seriously lacks sense.

For example, Brahmanas classify themselves into several groups and sub-groups. Until the last century, these sub groups were pretty closed and cross-group marriages were not allowed. Similar grouping systems exist among all Hindus.

jaati is cultural, so these can be expected, it had happened almost everywhere. Grouping systems is not limited to hinduism.

The english word caste is used for both Jaati and Varna.

does not mean both are the same, as you already know.

 

[kaisersose]

It is true that jaati is decided by birth; but it is something cultural and not religious, for jaati to be real life version of varna, varna should also be related to birth, but it is not. Your opinion seriously lacks sense.

In "illogical Hell" perhaps. In India, jaati is the manifestation of varna. A Brahmana can only be a Brahmana by birth and no other way. There is no difference between Brahmana jaati and Brahmana varna.

Hard to comprehend if your exposure to Hinduism is through books and/or global organizations like Iskcon.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

In "illogical Hell" perhaps. In India, jaati is the manifestation of varna. A Brahmana can only be a Brahmana by birth and no other way. There is no difference between Brahmana jaati and Brahmana varna.

Hard to comprehend if your exposure to Hinduism is through books and/or global organizations like Iskcon.

As a sociological statement what you say is true. Many scriptures and sects of Hinduism disagree. My culture is American I cannot become Indian. My interest is in Hindu sadhana and the Hindu scriptures. There are also Hindu cultures both past and present all over Asia ( Bali, Java, Vietnam just to name a few) that don't follow the caste system in the Indian way.

In Tantra the best caste is a hybrid caste (samanya)it is a mix of all castes. You just must follow the Tantic sadhana.

"Sarvavrnadhikaraschcha narinang yogya eva cha"

"The Tantra is for all men, of whatever caste, and for all women"

-Gautamiya Tantra

 

[Riverwolf]

I guess what's being misunderstood here is that there is a difference between Hinduism and Indian culture. There are plenty who believe that the two can never be separated. I'm of the school of thought that they can be.

 

[nameless]

In "illogical Hell" perhaps. In India, jaati is the manifestation of varna. There is no difference between Brahmana jaati and Brahmana varna

again, jaati is cultural, not religious. There is no validity for your claims, unless you produce some verses from scriptures to support them, ie varna of a person is decided by birth. If scriptures does not say so, then it implies jaati is cultural and not a manifestation of varna.

A Brahmana can only be a Brahmana by birth and no other way.

so this is cultural, since scriptures does not support this, ie jaati.

Hard to comprehend if your exposure to Hinduism is through books and/or global organizations like Iskcon.

too much of assumptions..but appreciating your attempt.