How does the karma theory of Hinduism work?

Take some time and follow through this enriching discussion on Karma, how it works, how it doesn't work, the role of free will, past actions, the future impact of action, or inaction ... 

Insightful exchanges throughout this post. Among the very best in the forum. Proud to share this. Bookmark it. You may need to come back to this  discussion at some point in your life :)

This discussion started off from a question on the origins of the term 'Chandala'. Dr. Koenraad Elst provides a deep historical and scriptural perspective. In the latter half of the discussion, Rajiv Malhotra explains Karma theory quite beautifully. This is followed by a refreshing sequence of Q&A.
 
November 2013
Need help with the meaning of a word: Chandala

Kiran asks:

"..  Recently somebody gave me a copy of Ravi Zacharias's DVD, Jesus among other gods, where in he quotes from Chandogya Upanishad 5.10.7 (8).  The english transaltion of the verse is below.

"When one acts piously, he attains a good birth. He is born as a brahmana or a kshatriya or a vaisya. When one acts sinfully, he attains a sinful birth. He is born as a dog, a pig, or an outcaste"

When I looked up the sanskrit verse, it says "Chandala" (womb of a chandala women). According to Wikipedia, Chandala means "Chandala is a Sanskrit word for someone who deals with disposal of corpses, and is a Hindu lower caste, formerly considered untouchables. Currently it is a term used specifically in Indo-Aryan speaking regions of India. Sandala has become a swear word in the colloquial usage of the Tamil language. Chandal is a general derogatory slur used to refer to a filthy, mean or low person^[1] in North India."

... Ravi says this verse promotes caste system, which is incorrect and seems like the verse was completely taken out of its context. (Upanishad talks about progression of atman in its journey to Mukti)
 

.... what is the real meaning of the word “Chandala”, is it possible this word had a different meaning during the post vedic period and over the period of time meaning of the word got changed based on its use."

Karthik forwards an interpretation from a priest:

"...This verse does not endorse any system of discrimination it merely states that whatever vasanas or habits one cultivates in life one reaps the fruits thereof in the next birth. The family that one is born into and the social circumstances of one’s birth are all due to Karma..."

Koenraad Elst comments: (glad to have Dr. Elst back after a long break!)

"... To say hazily that words just happen to undergo changes in meaning. Something more specific is needed, esp. on such a possibly very harmful quotation.

It is a fact that the very oldest mention of the reincarnation doctrine (of which the Rg-Veda is totally innocent) already implies the caste application of the karma interpretation of reincarnation. It is in this form the Uddalaka et al. first learn the doctrine from their king. It says that if you have shown a pleasant character, you will be born as a Brahmin, Kshatriya or Vaishya. These caste titles necessitate a caste translation of the second part: if you have led a stinking life, you will be born from a stinking womb: dog, pig or Chandala.

Chandala was originally an ethnonym of one of the Dravidian-speaking tribes of Central India, where you still have the Kandhs, Gonds etc.; probably the Kandaloi mentioned by Ptolemy in his geography....

At any rate, the emotive meaning of "Chandala" must have been something like "savage", "cannibal". So, in the moralistic version of the karma doctrine (future reward or punishment for your present conduct), caste is included in the calculus of auspiciousness: just as poverty, a handicap, slavery etc. are miserable conditions which may serve as karmic punishment, so also the birth in a lowly community, regardless of whether it is classified as "untouchable" or "tribal".

If you want to present Hinduism to the world as egalitarian, you will indeed have to straighten out quotes like this one from the Chandogya Upanishad. But to a Christian, you should not answer by apologizing for or refuting his understanding of the Upanishad quote. You should simply point at the Biblical repeated sanction for slavery or at Yahweh's repeated commandments to kill the unbelievers (e.g. the pious worshippers of Baal incarnated as the Golden Calf, made from their generously donated Jewels) or the strangers threatening to pollute the people's purity (e.g. the cheating and massacre of the Shechemites by the sons of Jacob). You may set your own house in order, but meanwhile you have to keep Christian meddlers out by refocusing their attention on their own injustices."

  

This resulted in a very interesting discussion by Rajiv Malhotra on the nature of karma theory, which we carry 'as' is to avoid any misinterpretation

 "There is a persistent confusion on the difference between the following two ideas:

A) Bad karma leads to future birth in adverse conditions, whereas good karma leads to future birth in good circumstances. (Karma theory)

B) A person should be treated by society depending on the type of parents. (Caste system as known today)

A is true as per Hindu dharma, but B is untrue. These ideas must be separated and differentiated. Otherwise people falsely conclude that A implies B.

Some points to consider are:

PART ONE:

1) One's karma leads to corresponding phala (consequence). This is the principle of causation. Karma X causes the effect Y. We might write it as: X ==> Y.

2) For Y to happen within the natural laws, the right conditions (Z) are necessary in which Y will happen. Z is simply the means by which Y will happen. If I am to die in a plane crash, I will "happen" to book a seat in that particular flight. It is not that the pilot or anyone else involved in the flight "caused" my death. It was coming to me. The circumstances (Z) leading to my death (such as pilot error, engine failure, hijacking, etc) were mere mechanisms to bring it about, but the effect of being killed was coming to me because of my own past karma.

3) In the above example, can we say that: Z ==> Y? Did the pilot error or engine failure or hijacking cause my death? Karma theory says NO. These were merely the mechanisms by which natural law could operate and bring my death. The real cause of Y was X, not Z.

4) Once you understand the above, then it becomes easy to appreciate that one's parents do not cause one to have certain experiences or propensities. These are the result of past karmas and the parents are merely the mechanisms. Each of us chose his or her parents, society, time and place of birth by virtue of the portfolio of karmas that needed to be expressed or played out.

PART TWO:

5) Even though a person has a specific circumstance at birth it does NOT follow that his entire life's outcomes will be pre-determined by that. There IS meritocracy at work. The outcomes in one's life will be a combination of both past karmas and one's use of free will in the present. Thus a man born in adversity can advance by his own actions and free choices. Conversely one can fritter away one's good conditions by being foolish, unethical etc. So one's life's outcomes are a combination of both past karma and free will that is exercised in the present.

6) Therefore, one cannot use past karma as excuse, and fail to take responsibility, or just give up. Conversely, one cannot take the good life for granted because of birth circumstances.

Hence, karma theory is NOT fatalism.

PART THREE:

7) The above has focused solely on one's own self: what I choose to do and how it impacts me. But what about one's attitudes towards someone else? Should my attitude towards a person be biased by that person's conditions? If yes, that would mean I am biased because he is born poor and hence I feel it was coming to him. Or if I am biased favorably towards a rich man because I feel his good karma made him rich. These biases would be WRONG on my part and they would be acts of bad karma by me. My attitude towards another person should be unbiased either way, and should be based entirely on what is MY RIGHTEOUS ACTION, I.E. MY SVA-DHARMA. The fact that he is in adverse conditions ought to generate sympathy/karuna, and not harsh judgment.

8) In other words, caste bias by me is wrong!!!

9) Karma theory is my guiding principle in my OWN actions. That is how I judge MYSELF, not others. My attitude towards others should be 'tat tvam asi'. "



Upon member request, Rajiv elaborates on tat tvam asi.
"There are many levels of this "second-person" practice. It culminates in what is called nididhyasana. To learn this get a good guru to initiate you in Shankara's Upadesa Sahasri or some other similar text.

At preliminary levels you can practice by seeing the other person as Brahman-playing-role-abc.

So you need bifocal vision: one vision seeing Brahman and the other seeing the person abc.

Also experience oneself at both levels: one anchored as atman, the other as "Rajiv" or whatever the role happens to be.

So one sees the Self-playing-1 interacting with the Self-playing-2. Note the Self is same in both cases but the roles are not.

The realm of action is where there is multiplicity of roles. Hence its a fallacy to escape into sameness citing all is one like many people do. But this dual vision keeps both one and many views in perspective.

Second-person practice is 24/7 or as often as you can remind yourself. It is easier when things are pleasant and the other party is likeable. But when there is tension, it is easy to slip into one of two ways: Either into sameness (forgetting the role), or into dualism of 1 fighting 2 (forgetting the Self).

Second-person practices are what we can practice living actively, transacting with others. It is meditation off the mat so to speak." 


Sree seems clarifications on Rajiv's discussions:
"I would like to clarify the balance between past karma and free will that is implied in dharmic philosophy, and how that free will component contributes to future karma.

I believe Part 2 is important i.e the outcome of a janma cannot depend solely on the initial state of karma. Because if so, then the state of karma at the beginning of Janma1 already determines the state of karma at the beginning of Janma2, which determines J3 etc., for all time.

However, Part 1 intrigues me. X ==> Y; Z is the mechanism for Y and is not responsible for causing Y. If so, then what about the karma of Z ? Does the pilot gain or lose karma because his errors caused the death of a person? What if it was a mugger Z who killed person Y who was scheduled to die because of X - will Z accumulate bad karma? By this logic, no. But then, how does anyone ever accumulate bad karma? Or good? "

Rajiv comment: This final point above is very important to discuss. If pilot is an intermediary, does HE accrue karma on his account?

The pilot has a separate account for his karma. He is accountable for his actions. But his karmic transaction is with the cosmos and not with me. So there can be many scenarios, such as:

1) Pilot was not in error or his error was without bad intentions. He does not incur karma on his account.

2) Pilot was committing something wrong and knew it, or was careless due to being drunk or some kind of violation of the rules that he could have avoided but did not. So pilot commits karma with the cosmos.

The important point is that either way his action is a karmic transaction with the cosmos and not with me... "

Jal goes deeper into the discussion:
"....In his example of X, Y and Z, my take is that the phala of X is not Y but it is Z. That is to say that the karmic consequence of one's action manifests itself as a circumstance but not as a fact/state of one's being. So if someone did something horrible (action X) then they must face as its phala an air crash (circumstance Z) which MAY OR MAY NOT result in their death (fact/state of their being Y) which will ultimately depend on my free will.


As a less subtle example, if someone shoots a bullet at me, that's a phala (circumstance) from my past action that I cannot prevent but whether I decide to [try to] get out of its way or resignedly accept my fate and stand still is my free will. Extending further, all circumstances in my life are phalas of my past actions and my reactions to these circumstances are my new actions which will decide my future circumstances...."


Rajiv comment: He makes a good point, but its more complex. Phala is not always a specific/concrete outcome though it can be that in some cases.
Usually the probability distribution of possible outcomes has changed as the result of phala. There is still uncertainty of concrete outcome as there is free will. But the probability distribution has become adversely impacted.

The point I wanted to make is something else: The pilot is not the culprit in whatever adversity I face, be it death or anything else. The pilot is a conduit for the phala to reach me, much like the postman who delivers a notice that could be good or bad news, or a bank teller who hands cash to a client but the teller is not a party to the transaction between the bank and client.
The transaction is between me and the cosmos, various intermediaries are like the postman or bank teller."


Maria has the next set of questions:
"
1- If there are not bad intentions, no karma is incurred? Or karma is incurred but less strong? I thought that even without bad intention, some karma is always incurred, in different degrees, from the simple fact of breathing to that of causing a death to somebody unintentionally or intentionally. We keep creating some karma or the other while we think we are the doers so, in fact, till the moment of enlightenment in which we are completely surrendered to Brahman. Only when we realise we are not the doer, then we don´t create or accumulate any karma. It is not like this?

...in the case of this pilot, the crux is not if he was mere intermediary or not for a karma of somebody else being realised, but the fact that, almost for sure, he would not be enlightened. So that action of him, even unintentionally, even as only an intermediary, does create karma for him. Maybe mild, but it does.

2- In the typical example of a plane crash in which all the passengers die, it must be true that the karma of all of them was to die in that very moment....logic says that our moment of death is inevitable. But it seems is not death that finds them, but that they book that very flight to look for their death, of course, unconsciously. This case always seems to me strange...

3- What about natural disasters? It is the karma of all the population of that place to die together? It has to be... ???

4- In the case of adoptions, which parents were to be their parents? Both biological and then adoptive?"




Rajiv provides a detailed response. Again, we carry it without omitting anything, but highlight some key points.

1. Karma account is individual. But often the phala is given collectively when multiple persons deserve similar phala even though their karmas were independent. So if the set of persons ( S) happen to be in the same plane crash, it does not necessarily imply (though it could in some cases) that all the members of S committed a collective karma and hence got a collective phala.
2. Karma theory cannot be reduced to an algorithm. It is not deterministic or reductionist. It is probabilistic and has some uncertainty of outcomes. Free will operates within a system of causation that has built in uncertainty as well. This is why Indian thinkers had little issue with quantum mechanics whereas western thought went into a tailspin and the leading quantum physicists Heisenberg and Schrodinger both referred to Vedanta as the only system that could make sense of it. (This started the massive digestion of Vedanta into new formulations by Westerners so as to domesticate it within their own frameworks.)
3. My karmic analysis should be specific to my own actions and consequences, and I should not in the same analysis also bring in some third party's karma or consequences. If I try to understand his karma as part of analyzing my karma, it will confuse me. His karma deserve a separate analysis in which I dont figure. So each individual does karmic transactions with the cosmos and not with one other. Analogy: I sold shares of IBM to the stock exchange and someone else bought them from the exchange, but we did not transact with each other.
4. For example: Rajiv causes harm to person X. Implications: (a) In Rajiv's account: Rajiv has new entry/perturbation in his karmic account with the cosmos. (b) In X's account: He got phala from cosmos (NOT from Rajiv). Plus, depending on his reaction to rajiv, he could be creating new karma in his account with the cosmos. Important point is that both persons karmically transact only with the cosmos and never with each other. The rest of the details are inconsequential as far as this point is concerned. Focus ONLY on this one point: Who is the karmic transaction with?
5. Notice there are two levels of transactions going on. At the visible/empirical or worldly level, the two persons are doing things to each other. Someone who does not believe in karma theory will accept this level of transactions, and he will think that it is the entire transaction. (So if he got away with a corrupt deed, he will think he has escaped.) This is the level of transactions we see openly. Where we disagree with such a person is that we also believe in a second level that takes places invisibly to us. This is the shadow level of transaction. The shadow transaction is the karmic transaction with the cosmos. It is causation that is in addition to the first level that is visible. Each time you do visible-action it automatically adds a perturbation into your individual karmic account with the cosmos in the shadow system. Karma system is a shadow system of causation between each individual and the cosmos.
6. Once you get this point, then the idea of caste by birth becomes clear.  First, my parents did not cause my circumstances as my phala came from the cosmos, and parents were mere facilitators. Second, the phala is probabilistic and not deterministic, meaning that I have free will to change my life. Third, how I react/respond to my circumstances creates new karma which is entirely up to me.

The implications are:

• Dont blame others for your present circumstances.
• You are not stuck in your circumstances long term.
• You must act in a dharmic manner in each present moment, in order to create positive karma going forward.

We have not discussed here how to transcend karma by performing nishkama, wherein actions continue selflessly without accruing karma. Thats another level of discussion.

Furthermore, we have also not discussed a very important: Performing karma with dual-lens as Krishna asks Arjun to do. (A) The men on the other side are ultimately the same atman. (B) But in this role/manifestation they are men who must be killed, and Arjun-as-role-player must perform his svadharma and do this.

Its best to leave these two points for future threads. The main treatment above must be understood and not get sidetracked with these two more advanced levels of understanding."

Aditya has the next followup:
"does inaction on one's part create a karmic entry/perturbation? So, for example, if I walk past a beggar on the street and clearly have enough money in my pocket to give him but choose not to do so, then will this be a negative entry/perturbation with respect to the cosmos that I must deal with later on?"


Rajiv comment: "Great question. Physical action or inaction is not relevant. What was the intention in taking action or in not taking action?

This is where a living guru is important as only such a person can read your intentions and put them in context of the circumstances. My guru gave different advice to different persons on this very question, and it depended on multiple factors. If it is nishkama (non-doer mode) there is no karma accrued because "you" did not do it  it is prerna (divine inspiration). But if "you" have intentions or vested interest then it is karma if you elected to escape action out of self-interest  ego-driven desire to help. My most favorite question used to be: How do I know when the desire to help is prerna and when it is ego-driven? At times guru said Who are you wanting to get involved in what is none of your business; your ego seeks self-importance. At other times guru said This person needing help is Bhagvan and the situation came to you with prerna to act in a detached manner that is helpful.

So I dont think I can answer generally it depends on all the facts in a given situation. Nor am I qualified to be a guru who can evaluate all your circumstances. My advice is: You need a guru for at least a decade during your formative period of practice." 

Chir comments:
"Is there a book you would recommend that would give me more insights into karma and how it works or  how to understand/interpret it. Something that explains karma from not just Vedanta's interpretation but also from Samkhya and maybe Buddhism side (basically from various different schools)... I remember long time back you recommended a book on nondualism, Non-duality by David Roy. Do you think that would be a good start, since you also mention about karma with dual-lens?"

Rajiv comment: There are important areas of difference among various interpretations of karma in Indian philosophy. But I gave my own insights, not a canned/standard view from any particular text.

Buddhists do not go into detailed mechanics of karma and nor do Vedanta texts. Both these philosophies focus more on ultimate reality's relationship to provisional reality, and not so much on the details of how provisional reality functions. Samkhya gives a lot of detail on karma. But none of these philosophical explanations is very complete and much of what we know comes in the form of stories rather than a systematic end-to-end model per se. So you have to extrapolate a model/system by learning from anecdotes and examples.

...This eclectic method bothers many bookworms wanting a specific X or Y school's position. Other bookworms say "aha! I discovered that you must be in school X" just because I happened to use an example from there. Because they cannot think out of the box, they project this limitation upon others.
....
In the West there is an emerging field called "constructive theology" where Biblical scholars extrapolate, innovate and propose new solutions. They connect the dots in their own ways and this gets debated among them. Classical Christian texts do not address many issues people want to address today and this is done under constructive theology. In Hinduism we have smritis to do this job of innovation. In a sense my interpretations would fall under that. The laziness of our thinkers (who can do little beyond parroting) shows -- as in one example of a member writing persistently to me privately complaining that I must belong to some "sect X" because of what I write. They just cannot think out of the box."


 
Kundan adds:
"In addition to the beautiful explanation that Rajiv ji has given, you would want to check out "Problem of Rebirth" by Sri Aurobindo. Also there are two chapters in Sri Aurobindo's "Letters on Yoga: Volume 1 titled "Rebirth" and "Free Will, Karma" etc that you would want to check out."


Jal adds:
"I feel there is some confusion regarding the terms "probability distribution", etc., as used by Shri RM,. Terms "probabilistic", "non-deterministic", etc. - all allude to the concept of uncertainty. This uncertainty may stem from two possible sources and thus these terms may be understood to have two different shades of meaning:

Randomness: Dharma does not admit randomness, which is just another term for lawlessness, an antonym for Dharma. Hence this concept of randomness is Dharma-viruddh and hence must be shunned. I am almost sure randomness is NOT what Shri RM means when he uses the term "probabilistic".

Dynamic-ness: The other concept pertains to the ever-changing, fluid nature of Reality, which too leads to uncertainty. However, unlike randomness, this concept does not betray any lawlessness or anti-science character. It does agree with a law-based if-then determinism, in compliance with science... However the condition itself being fundamentally indeterminable (mainly because of consciousness and fundamental freedom of the self), the resultant fact too is indeterminable. Thus while admitting non-determinism, this concept is quite Dharma-sangat and should be adopted. (This is also a strong retort against fatalism that is unnecessarily imposed on the law of karma and hence important to understand.)"


Rajiv comment: Distinction between uncertainty in the cosmos and uncertainty in human ability and perception. Latter means inherent limit in the ordinary mind. All science, physics, knowledge is in the latter realm - i.e. wnat is know-able."

RMF Summary: Week of July 25 - 31, 2011

July 26

Protest 'Sita sings the blues' showing at NY's Starlight Pavilion ! Srikumar posts: ...We have received complaints from several Hindus about the showing of a film 'Sita sings the blues' at the Starlight Pavilion in New York next Thursday (21st July). 'Sita sings the blues', which its producers claim to be based on Sage Valmiki's Ramayan, is actually a denigrating parody of the Ramayan ! Through this animation film, animator Nina Paley has shown irreverent parallels between her own heartbreak and the divine story of Lord Rama and Mother Sita,... Patanjali notes: "The organizers and host have decided to cancel showing the film after mountain of complaints from the Hindu community." Ramanan makes an important point: "Love this one in particular: "In the Ramayana, Sita is only a footnote in the story, but obviously my film is about Sita and her suffering." Source: http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/faq.html The above statement by Ms. Paley shows her ignorance of the epic. Valmiki has this to say about his own work: ... The entire epic Ramayana is primarily about the sublime conduct of Sita, and secondly about the slaying of Ravana.   Chitra adds: " ... It's interesting to me that this movie "Sita Sings the Blues" has resurfaced – and that the main thrust of the anger at this movie is still focused at Nina Paley. I was furious at this movie.  But not so much at Paley.  Paley is a gifted animator – her interpretation of the character of Rama and the plight of Sita is in line with western perspectives – I found no real surprises there.   To me, the real significance of her movie and the reaction to it is what it tells us about our fellow Indians. You see, I was INCENSED by the commentary of her "shadow puppet" narrators of the Ramayana.  To me, they were a painful reminder of how utterly (almost deliberately) clueless some Indians are about their own cultural legacy.  Some remarks by the "shadow puppets" were so asinine I flinched. " Anila suggests: "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzTg7YXuy34>]. Just click below the video, click on the Flag. In the drop-down menu, select 'Violent & Repulsive Content'. With enough votes, this video will have to be taken off YouTube." Rajiv Malhotra comments: When this movie was being made, our very own Anju Bhargava (yes, the Hindu American leader featured in Breaking India for her complicity with the Christian nexus) was approached by the makers. She gave them a favorable reinforcement of the script, seeing it as women's  empowerment. Only after it came out several years later, and caused a stir, did Anju realize the problem she had been a part of. This is just one example of how ill-informed many of our "leaders" tend to be - focusing to build their personal profile with appointments, high profile publicity, etc. Serious research, reading, intellectual inquiry, etc., is not natural to them...  Manas notes the response of a known Hindu baiter: "Salil Tripathi takes the opportunity of Paley's movie show being cancelled to throw muck on Hindus, for among other things, critiquing Coutright [for his concoctions], etc. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/24/sita-sings-the-blues-hindu-film-causes-a-stir-in-queens.html Instead of calling for "bans", there should be a scholarly analysis and pointing out of mistakes." Doclse007 responds: "Having seen this movie for the first time a few days ago I am in a position to make an informed comment. The movie distorts the Ramayana and makes a mockery of what we have held sacred for generations. If Ms. Paley wanted to make a movie about her life based on a love story in popular literature then there are many to choose from, including the works of Shakespeare. West Side Story is based on Romeo and Juliet. The Ramayana does not lend itself to this kind of treatment and therefore her argument about artistic freedom lacks substance. .."    July 27  Is the Hajj an act of apostasy? Comments? Namaste, In view of the recent discussion about the Taj Mahal, would anyone care to weigh in on this article by Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. Harihara responds: "But the idea of drawing similarity between "Kaaba" with "Kaabali" is wrong. Kapalishwara is one of the epithets for Shiva. Since Tamizh doesn't have a proper phonetics background especially, after the admixture of Sanskrit words, Tamilians pronounce both "p" and "b" accordingly it presents to their tongue..." Chitra is thankful: " Thank you for that much-needed clarification,  Mr. Subramanian. I don't doubt that ancient Hindus had cultural and trade contacts with Arabs, but the kind of  etymological  eureka-moments such as the following excerpt from the article make me wince and reach for the Hajj-Mola..." July 27 Retired IB Officer on Binayak Sen-- Western interests behind Sen's ' ... From: Madhukar Ambekar <madhukar_ambekar@...> Date: Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:41 AM Subject: Retired IB Officer on Binayak Sen To: Madhukar Ambekar... July 27 Re: More of the myth-- Growth of schedulaed castes and tribes N. S. Rajaram provides yet a useful reference. One of many expert recommendations you will find within these archives. "Please read K.S. Lal's "The Growth of Scheduled Tribes and Castes in Medieval India" for a scholarly study of this issue. Lal was an outstanding scholar worth reading" July 27 Report of my Waves talk http://www.waves-india.com/WAVES_Rport_Rajiv_Lecture.htm... July 28 List of "Secular" Intellectuals named hosted by Ghulam Nabi Fai Sagar posts: S. Gurumurthy, has written an article which has a list of "seculars" and "liberals" named by FBI as guest of Ghulam Nabi Fai(who was recently arrested). The... July 29 More of the myth NeeShabda writes: The task of breaking the 'Aryan Myth' is arduous and never ending, but as all informed educated Indian it is our individual responsibility to continue the work that Rajiv Malhotra has started - to confront and open a dialogue with the Indologist, teacher, layman, anyone who is perpetuating the myths and downgrading the Indian civilization. I happen to find this site called mrdowling.com," and read some of his online course on India. I am sharing some chapters with all of you..." Neeraj asks: "Till now, I have not been able to find any reference of untouchability as a practice in Hindu/Sanatan/Vedic/Arya dharm, on the basis of caste. Can anyone provide such a reference " Raj provides many useful links in his response: "Further reading: [1] *MUST READ* - By Vishal Agarwalji - http://www.docstoc.com/docs/67764904/The-Hindu-Caste-System-Vishal-Agarwal [2] Section D here - http://www.letindiadevelop.org/irochtc/02.shtml [3] Related messages posted here earlier: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/102 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/129 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/184 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/221 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/440 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/breakingindia/message/433..." Senthil provides some feedback: "Our society is NOT based on any book or authority, and hence it would be futile to find any reference to untouchability in scriptures.. we are a civilization and NOT religion.. As a person coming from rural side, and who have seen untouchability practiced right in my home, i am putting forth the following reality.. 1. Untouchability is NOT practiced just by brahmins.. but by all jaathis.." Vishal is emphatic: "... Hindus are not a Bookish religion but the Shastras are the prime authority for what is correct and what is wrong. Sadachar ranks below shruti and smriti in terms of what constitutes authority in matters of Dharma. Traditions can be correct or incorrect, and they change with time anyway. So they CANNOT constitute what is Sanatana Dharma. The localized, parochial version of Dharma that you conceive has largely ceased to exist today and surely does not belong to the future..."   Mrithak posts: "Below is the quote that I copied from Sankarachaarya's Brahma-sutra-bhaasya regarding the great achaarya's objection to teaching the vedas to the sudras. As i see it the explanation given by Sri Sankarachaarya is more of sanskrit gymnastics. BRAHMA-SUTRA-BHASYA (Topic 9: PSEUDO SUDRA, I.iii.34 & 35)..."  Vishal responds: "... Shri Shankaracharya was conditioned by the times when he wrote his commentary. The context of the story is this: The entire story emphasizes the point that while it is important to be Dharmic, it is not sufficient. Brahmavidya trumps Dharma. Now, Janshruti was a philanthropic and a just king but he had this ego that by his benevolence, everyone in his kingdom was happy. However, the swan belittled his glory in front of that of Raikyamuni Shaktayana (The cart owner, Muni of the Raikas). The very name of the Muni indicates that he was a nomad and therefore not an Arya in the conventional sense, but a Shudra. However, Janashruti judged Raikya by his external appearances and tried to BUY the wisdom that Raikya had by offering him money. Raikya in turn addressed the despearate king, who was grieving for having been slighted relative to Raiky as a Shudra (cock a snook, so to say). It was only when Janashruti offered his daughter as a wife to Raikya that the latter relented.... ...The teaching that Raikya gave to Janashruti also emphasizes that Brahmavidya trumps Dharma (or that excellent Karma is not sufficient for Moksha, and Brahmavidya is the crown of punyakarma)... ...  So far from debarring Shudras from acquiring Brahmavidya, the Upanishad actually shows how a Shudra teacher gives the teaching to a Kshatriya. Likewise, the following story of Satyakama Jabala in the Upanishad shows how a child of unknown parentage becomes qualified to acquire Brahmavidya by virtue of being truthful because a truthful person cannot be a 'abrahmana' (non brahmana'.... ...Far from being 'casteist', the entire Chhandogya Upanishad is actually a very liberating Scripture that shows that Shraddha of lowly dogs trumps ritual of learned Brahmanas, that Brahmavidya of a nomad trumps royal wealth and good deeds, that truth trumps lineage, and that even a person of a high lineage is not really a Brahmana unless he knows the Brahmavidya. And the seventh Prapathaka in turn has the story of Narada and Sanatkumara which shows how all bookish knowledge is of no worth when compared to Spiritual wisdom." July 31 book on similar intervention in south america by Rockefeller, Evange Thy Will Be Done: The Conquest of the Amazon : Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil [Paperback]Gerard Colby ...

RMF Summary: Week of March 22-28, 2011

March 22

Another example for chpt 8 - Kalai Kaviri [Chpt 8 discusses numerous ways by which inculturation is being used to dupe naive Hindus into slipping into Christianity without knowing it. The appropriation of Hindu bharatnatyam dance to propagate Christianity is given as one example. Below is another.] Kalai Kaviri was founded by a Jesuit priest by name Fr. S.M. George in 1977 at Tiruchirappalli in the Southern part of India... ... no Christian family came forward to support him as dance was considered profane.... ... Kalai Kaviri brought out ‘Yesu Kaaviyam’ the poetical life history of the Jesus Christ written by the famous Tamil film lyricist Kannadasan... ... many tourists from various countries, Catholic fraternity in particular started showing interest in Kalai Kaviri visiting the institution. With such rapid growth, Kalai Kaviri inaugurated the full-time Bharathanatyam diploma course ... ... Inspired by the art forms fostered in the Hindu temples, Kalai Kaviri choreographed Indian classical and semi-classical dances on liturgical themes and presented them during the masses. Such performances were acclaimed to by the Christian community the world over as something unique and the first of its kind.... ... In 1999, Kalai Kaviri introduced Post-graduate degree courses in Bharathanatyam and music... Rakesh asks: "Frankly, what is wrong with this? Afterall, Rukmini Arundale, had to recuperate Bharata Natyam from a Devadasi art form which was looked down upon, and make it respectable for most Hindus. In fact Hindus should appropriate western art forms to propogate their culture. Imagine providing an intellectual back bone to the traditional African and Latin American faiths by incorporating the Peruvian Inca Sun God as Surya Narayana and Krishna and Kali as the Black Pride Divinities. It is better to make Hinduism an inclusive, global faith..."  Response to Rakesh's post: [Inclusiveness is not the same thin as appropriation for the sake of deception.] Inclusiveness is sharing the same platform with another idea or culture with equal diginity. What Kalai Kaviri is doing is not what Rukmini Arundale did. Inclusivism is not appropriating other culture and practices. Interpreting the Peruvian and African gods and godesses as Hindu gods and goddess would be appropriation. However, researching about similarities and differences is a different matter altogether. [What is being criticized is INCULTURATION which is a very defined Church strategy to assimilate "portions" of the target culture in order to make Christianity more easily accepted. It is their entry strategy. This is not what genuine inclusiveness means. When Ravana came dressed like a sadhu, he was not practicing inclusiveness.]] Another commentator states: "Christian inculturation camouflages and conceals its real tentions and does not come with benign intentions." March 22 Look at who is coming to educate Indians!! ARTICLE IN INDIAN EXPRESS After Beijing, University of Chicago plans centre in Delhi A prestigious university, with a well-established academic reputation for... March 23 Varna and Caste (jati): What Vedic Literature says - article Vedic Literature Says Caste by Birth is Unjust By Stephen Knapp (Sri Nandanandana dasa)             ...We all know that the Vedic system of Varnashrama has been mentioned in the Vedic literature in many places. But it seems that many people still don't understand how it was meant to be implemented. It is not because of Varnashrama, but because of this misunderstanding of what it really is that has caused so many of India's social problems. This article contains many quotes from Vedic shastra to clarify what the Varnashrama or caste system is actually supposed to be... March 24 USCIRF Reports an Analysis (Chapter 15) Aravindan Neelakandan: Chapter 15 of 'Breaking India' deals with the US Government's direct involvement in Indian society and polity. The book shows how the US Commission on International Religious Freedom is one such tool for intervention.(Pages 271 to 283) The book shows how every one in the commission has been handpicked to serve the agenda of US political interests. They are also people with strong global evangelical ambitions. For example its past commissioners include Eliot Abrams, undersecretary of state for President Ronald Reagan and notorious for his role in the Iran-Contra Affair. Another key commissioner of USCIRF Richard Land was named by TIME magazine as one of the twenty five most influential evangelicals in America... A. Neelakandan then responded to a question from a commentator: //In the first part, you will notice a question referring to the "brahmanical" system of "enforcing" varna. Is that historically true? That is, did brahmins actively "enforce" varna, or did they just strictly "observe" it?// Yesterday a well known Marxist writer interviewed me for his blog on 'Breaking India'. If you know Tamil please go through the audio interview. The interview precisely touches upon this question. [Here is the mp3 version of the Tamil interview]. http://marudhang.blogspot.com/2011/03/blog-post_21.html Varna system could not have been enforced by any particular community. Those communities that wielded political, financial powers along with those who were considered the authorities of Dharma should have created this over a long period of time and with enormous regional variations. It was a social contract at its best and it had its ills and merits. March 24 Re: N.S. Rajaram's column on human rights hypocrisy The following column on 'Human rights Madness' appeared in the latest issue of Newsgram. March 24 Re: Who educates Indian MP's - guess ?-- who is to blame?  N. S. Rajaram: Why blame them? They are just filing the vacuum left by Hindu 'thinkers' or 'non-thinkers'. For over a decade myself and others have been urging the Sangh organizations to set up some bona fide think tanks devoted to education, economics and especially national security. They need to be staffed by outside scholars of proven track record. But what do they do? They coin some Sanskrit term like Bauddhik Sangh, Itihasa Samiti, Vedic mathematics, etc and put people with no qualifications beyond Sangh association. Sangh organizations have saddled themselves with the debilitating dogma tha answers are to be found by going back to an imaginary Vedic past. This revivalist attitude hangs like an albtross around the necks (and brains) of Sangh thinkers, and they are sinking deeper into the morass. So why blame the Ford Foundation if they are filling the vacuum left by Hindu 'bauddhiks'? March 25 Dark side of giving: The rise of philanthro-capitalism This article was forwarded by my friend Prashanth Vaidyaraj. It notes from the economic stand point the truth of how philanthropic money is being used to not... March 25 Wickileaks: US Ambassador monitored Dalit tensions secretly Please note that this is ""This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available... March 26 Christians launch political party in Tamil Nadu Varna and jati (caste) we have already covered lengthy and useful debates on this topic and this thread continues the analysis. Here is the link to the previous discussion. Vijaya Rajiva: Comment on Dr. Elst's observation that Jati and Hinduism have been associated for at least two thousand years: Jati has been wrongly translated as 'caste' since the Portuguese did so based on their erroneous theory of different races existing in India. There were a variety of ethnicities in ancient India, but not different races. Jati arose out of the shrenis (guilds) out of economic necessity, the need for specialisation for producing the goods for both trade and domestic consumption. It is generally assumed that shrenis did not exist in the early Vedic period, although some scholars seem to think that there were the beginnings of shrenis in that time frame. Certainly by the post Vedic period they existed and the loose social formations of the period became crystallised into Jatis... Dr. Aravindan Neelakandan responded to Vijaya Rajiva. I've carried more detailed excerpts since Dr. Neelakandan cited a short story of Isaac Asimov as a reference in his response :)    //I disagree with your implicit statement that Jati and Hinduism are actually intertwined. In that regard you and Dr.Elst seem to be in agreement!// No. Exactly opposite is the case. Perhaps the following statement of mine has been misunderstood: //So Jaathi is as inherently intertwined with Hinduism as much as birth-based institutions of Europe are inherently intertwined with Christian theology.// Now the birth-based multi-layered institutions of pre-modern Europe were supported by Christian theologians and law-makers. This does not make Christianity, in the eyes of modern scholars, a supporter of this system. However with Hinduism different yard sticks are used. An essentialist argument is put forth to say that Hinduism is intertwined with Jaathi. This is simply not the complete picture and is a distorted picture of history. In this connection, with regard to the evolution of untouchability, one of the best insights on the subject is in an unexpected realm. I suggest the science fiction short story "Strikebreaker," by Isaac Asimov, in "Anthropology Through Science Fiction", (Ed. Carol Mason, Martin Harry Green- berg, and Patricia Warrick, New York: St. Martin's Press, 1974)Unfortunately I lost my copy of this wonderful collection.:( In the related discussion, Asimov states that caste system evolves in a society with limited resources and limited mobility... ...Veracity of this speculation by the good doctor of science fiction, can be further validated by the fact that pre-Modern Europe also had defiled trades and ritual notions of purity and untouchability. It is not just an accident that not many works or literature can be found on this subject in the Western curriculum. The one rare book I came across in this regard is "Defiled Trades and Social Outcasts: Honor and Ritual Pollution in Early Modern Germany" by Kathy Stuart (Cambridge University Press 2006)... [I found a free and legal archived pdf link to Kathy Stuart's work here] ... So we need not justify or label Jaathi as an uniquely Indic phenomenon. But what one finds unique as an Indian is this: There is not a single instance of mass movement in Christendom that spoke for these voiceless people of dishonorable trades. ... So caste system can evolve anywhere given the appropriate social conditions. In India it became rigid with colonial resource drain. In Europe it withered away with enormous inflow of capital and resources ... ... I also think those who want to somehow preserve the Jaathi and project it in a positive light often fail to see the dark alchemy that this system is undergoing in India....  ... Here let me again quote 'Breaking India' which deals more objectively the situation and the pros and cons of Jaathi. This is from Chapter 5 of the book and is under the sub-heading "Building on Max Muller's work": Prior to colonialism, the jati-varna system in India had little, if anything, to do with race, ethnicity, or genetics. It was better understood as a set of distinctions based on traditional or inherited social status derived from work roles... ... Max Müller, who was largely responsible for entrenching the racial framework for studying jati, had his own evangelical motive. In his view, caste: which has hitherto proved an impediment to conversion of the Hindus, may in future became one of the most powerful engines for the conversion...  ... Today Jaathi has become an important and effective tool for community evangelism. So those who bat for it should take this worrying aspect into consideration. [there were some followup responses, but for brevity, we will stop here. Readers can click the RMF link and read the discussion in its entirety] March 28 Princeton Univ, March 31: My debate with prominent Indian Christian Rajiv Malhotra: On March 31, Princeton Univ will hold a discussion/debate on my book, "Breaking India: Western Interventions in Dravidian and Dalit Faultlines." The response to my talk will be given by the Rev. Dr. Nehemiah Thompson. He is the Pastor at Wesley United Methodist Church, as well as General Secretary, National Association of Asian American Christians in the USA. He is a well-known leader for Dalit activism before the UN, US Government in Washington, Indian Embassy, and media.

March

RMF Summary of a Single Discussion on Jati - March 17, 2011

There was an interesting debate on 'Tribe' and 'Caste' in March 2011 that is worth a more detailed summary. This post covers that discussion. Here's the link to the original thread:

Fw: Tribe and caste(jati) .The discussion was initiated by Dr. Vijaya Rajiva as a response to Dr. Koenraad Elst (probably continuing from a discussion earlier in March 2011). Not surprisingly, this is by far among the most vigorously debated issues in the early life of the forum that was devoted to topics covered in the book 'Breaking India'. Topics in this summary cover caste, race, Aryan Invasion Theory (debunked), Untouchability and its origins, birth-based discrimination, etc. " Tribe and jati are both endogamous, but the jati is integrated with the shreni (guild) and the tribe is not. Dear Dr. Elst, Strictly speaking those Hindus who believe that Hinduism has nothing to do with caste or untouchability are right. There was no untouchability in the Vedic period and the Jati(caste) is related to the development of Shreni (guild), which is a post Vedic phenomenon. How the socio-economic entity the Jati (caste) is related to the later Hindu scriptures is an interesting question and worth some investigation." This assertion was questioned by a commentator 'Rakesh': "I think this is a convenient argument, that undermines our credibility. We embrace the post-vedic, non-vedic Bhakti and Yoga, as they are positives. But when some one talks about a negative we run back to vedic times to say we are spotless on caste. A mature approach would be to accept that Hinduism is not perfect and so what ?" Rajiv Malhotra noted: "Chapter 5 of the book [BI] is on Lord Risley's work in the thriving discipline called Race Science in which Europeans were applying Dardins new theory of evolution of species to human races, and colonialists were specially interested in figuring out each of the races being ruled by them. Risley's personal hatred for Indians is well established and his very explicit work on Race Science. His was an ethnologist compiling field data to support these theories. His method consisted of measuring skulls .... ...None of this says anything about Vedic culture being perfect or otherwise. It merely says that these constructs we got used to are Eurocentric and were downloaded as Apps to colonize Indians." K. Venkat presented a very long and detailed response on an earlier post by Dr. Elst on 'Chandalas'. Only excerpts are included here and the reader is urged to read this in its entirety in the original thread: "On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Koenraad Elst wrote: "Chandella looks like it is derived from the related tribal ethnonyms Gond/Kond/Kandh. So does, probably, Chandâla. Ptolemy mentions the Kandaloi as an Indian tribe. In Wendy Doniger's Manu Smrti translation, Chandâla is given a literal interpretation, "the 'fierce' untouchables", which may well be how Manu himself understood the term." KV: There is a significant danger in making etymological guesses. Chandela and Chandala need not be, and are not, related in any way. The Chandella Rajputs who flourished towards the end of the first millennium would not have proudly advertised their name had it been associated with chandala. Just to give a counter example, *Chandola* is a surname often used by brahmins in the north. It would be silly to argue that this too is related to chandalas. The Chandalas are not an untouchable jati ... ...  One must look for asprsya or teenda (Tamil) for untouchability. One does not find them until the 12th century CE. Race, jati, and tribe are all inter-related. They are all rooted in genetics and that is why one finds unique funerary and wedding rites, culinary customs, and dialect often related with each of these constructs.... ...  If you want to find a bone marrow or heart or tissue donor, your highest likelihood of success is within your own jati. All of these underscore the need for a reasonable discussion on jati unconstrained by western prejudices and ignorance... " ... Untouchability is a late entrant into Hindu society. It was the result of colonization. But the single most factor (there are others --- but later on that) that sustained untouchability is the lack of hygiene. As some jatis fell into economic despair as a result of colonial subjugation they also slowly fell into unhygienic ways. In the pre-modern world, Hindus shared common wells for bathing etc so hygiene was paramount. A jati that did not live up to the social standards of hygiene were treated as untouchables. This ensured that India did not suffer epidemics like Europe did. So, untouchability is not some "upper caste" ploy against "lower castes." It was a natural social defense against epidemics... ... Sri Narayana Guru, the Ezhava-born Hindu saint, insisted on the need for his followers to remain very hygienic. Ezhavas followed his advice. I understand the need to let go western constructs on race and caste and support articulating these form the Hindu point of view. My only caution is that we do not throw science out in the process. " Karigar cautions against western 1:1 mapping of Indic categories:  "I'd submit that the Indic categories (Jaati, Varna, kula, gotra, et al) and Western categories ( race, tribe, 'caste', 'ethnic group') may have certain strong correspondences, that may be, but it is certainly no One-on-One. Much overlaps, & even more does not. The trajectories of Indian civilization/society have enough uniqueness to warrant this." N.S shares some interesting empirical/statistical results from genetic studies: " ... scanning significant chunks of the genome (not just one chromosome) has now become quite affordable and some hobbyists (who are technically well equipped) are doing selective admixture analyses. One such effort (by a hobbyist, Zack Ajmal) is http://www.harappadna.org/ and you can see the results for the first 50 participants (I am #41). Essentially every single person who is Indian (or Bangladeshi and perhaps most Pakistanis), regardless of caste weighs most on the "south-asian" component (which is presumably an amalgamation of ancient south and north indian components going back tens of thousands of years). Every single person who is clearly not Indian (eg. Iranian or Iraqi) does not load much on the southasian component. The nonIndians are easily distinguishable from the Indians (defining an Indian as one with 2 Indian parents)..." BNA recommends a book: "Dear SriRam - Your observation is very good. One must read the book "Journey of Man" by Spencer Wells - A National Geographic research work. This is available in India also and in Amazon. He has studied all races around the world ..." NS responds to one of BNA's assertions: "... Hi Bala, Your characterization of single male line shared by Indians is likely incorrect as are the observation re female lines and relevance of the Puranas reference; there is no reason to restrict ancestry analysis to the Y chromosome (for the male line) or mitochondrial DNA (female line). It is very tempting to project our current belief systems onto emerging data which really don't need to have any respect for them a priori. That Puranas are a respected and important part of our traditions does not make them an all purpose oracle.... "  Seshadri presents a different point of view: "I cannot understand this preoccupation with genome based identity fixing. Is it eugenics in its modern form. Or scientific Racism. The socalled research methods and sampling strategies and selectivity in assumptions and paradigms - all are intractable.... " NS responded to Seshadri with: "...   I do not see how knowing the facts about human evolution as best as current day science allows us is equivalent to endorsing eugenics. The genie is loose and there is no putting it back in the bottle. I think some basic forms of eugenics are universally endorsed by almost every one as when the fetus is scanned for genetic defects. I think it is safe to predict that less than 100 years from now, we'll have all sorts of medical procedures that operate via gene modifications ..." At this point in the thread, Dr Koenraad Elst commented on the origin of the word 'Arya' leading to five responses. We will summarize this sub-thread before returning to the original topic. Here is the link to the original sub-thread: " Someone here voiced the widespread opinion that "Arya" only means "noble". I venture to differ. While the term had no racial ("Nordic") or linguistic ("Indo-European") meaning, it did originally have an ethnic meaning. On this, invasionist linguist JP Mallory and anti-invasionist historian Shrikant Talageri agree. At least, it has a relative ethnic meaning, not designating a particular nation, but being used by several Indo-European nations (viz. Anatolians, Iranians and Paurava Indians) in the sense of "compatriot", "one of us". This term, in India, then evolved to "one who shares the civilizational norms of the Vedic Paurava tribes", "Veda-abiding", "civilized". And thence "noble"." Rajiv Malhotra added: "The famous "Four Noble Truths" that define Buddhism are called the Four Arya Truths in the original Sanskrit. Clearly, Buddha did not refer to the truths of a specific race. His further description of what these truths consist of has nothing to do race at all. Hence, I reject that Arya = race. Many Sanskrit terms are very contextual in meaning. Hence a literal translation into one normative meaning (a common tendency among Westerners) is reductionist " N. S. Rajaram spoke about South Indian practices: "It [Arya] was and still is used by South Indian groups identifying oneself as 'civilized'. Most recently, 'eedigaas' a community traditionally associated with harvesting toddy from palm trees changed their designation to 'arya eedigaas'. Of course Chettiars call themselves Arya Vaishyas. " Come added: "Throughout the world, many people if not most have called themselves "the best" in their respective languages (.i.e the Franks, the Ewins, the Heruli in the West, the Han in China etc...) to affirm their distinctiveness and superiority over their neighbours. That can hardly be equated to race..." Karigar noted: " As the book clearly sees, & shows it's readers, the "aryan" issue currently is a swampy one where discussions can just get bogged down, as some discussions here are..." This concludes the summary on the "Arya" subthread and return to the main topic on Tribe/Jati/Caste.   Koenraad Est commented on Israeli genetic studies: "The one country and community way ahead of everyone else is Israel and the Jews. Genetic data have been used to prove that Ashkenazi, Sephardi and Oriental Jews are biologically much closer related to one another than to their respective Central/East-European, West-Mediterranean and Arab neighbours. Less conveniently, these also show that the Palestinians are likewise close relatives, and the closest are the Kurds, ... ... In evolutionary psychology, we see the beginnings of a comeback of genetic explanations of caste coupled with IQ. Richard Lynn & Tatu Vanhanen in *IQ and the Wealth of Nations*, Michael H. Hart in *Understanding Human History* and Steve Sailer in his blog have claimed that the average IQ of Indians is quite low, like that of Arabs, higher than Africans but lower than Europeans and much lower than the IQ champions, Ashkenazi Jews and Northeast-Asians(Hitler disliked IQ tests because Jews came out too smart) .. Chitra responded to Elst: " Dr. Elst, I do enjoy your posts, even on the occasions when I disagree.  In this case it appears you are describing a line of thinking , not saying that you necessarily buy into it.  Still, this frog would like to briefly share the view from her personal lily-pad. As the parent of a now young adult daughter with autism, my personal experience confirms the following : 1. Yes, IQ means something. It ranks people on their ability to perform certain tests.  But it is no more an assurance of what people can do with it than having two arms and all one's fingers intact is a guarantee of becoming a future concert pianist.  The human is the most variable variable on the planet -- and each human is affected in turn by the humans surrounding him/her.  Natural endowments can be shaped for the better or worse by values, circumstances, economic hardship, emotional setbacks... "  Aravindan Neelakandan added: "'Breaking India', in its Appendix-A, has a comprehensive overview of how consistently attempts were made to fabricate a scientific authenticity to the racial framework that colonial milieu has evolved. It was interesting to see that the Western scholars often with limited data would come out with the conclusion that the foreign Aryans model has been upheld. But a larger and more detailed study of the population by Indian scholars proved the initial study wrong. But the scientific rebuttal by Indian scholars did not get the same media lime light that the initial limited unscientific study by western scholars... ....Jatis were dynamically moving in and out of the Varna space due to various socio-political, economic reasons... ...The book makes it clear that it is for social justice and affirmative action for the betterment of the marginalized sections of society. It points that the quicker we ease out the faultlines in our society with justice and through democratic means the better.... " Rina Mukherji comments on the origins of caste-based discrimination (in areas north of South India): "I do not know much about the dalits of southern India. But there are several experts who believe that discrimination along caste lines arose when Hindus who had converted to Buddhism came back into the Hindu fold. In eastern and northern India, Brahmins who returned back into Hinduism were put to work on funerary rites; and to this day, other Brahmins generally do not intermarry with them..." Venkat provides some stunning statistics: "1. The per capita crime rate against the Harijans is one fifteenth the per capita crime rate against non-Harijans. Contrast this with the apartheid prevalent against the blacks in America's churches or with the fact that one in nine black men in the age group of 25-35 is incarcerated ... Elst gave a good example of how genetic data has been used to almost eliminate Tay-Sachs among the Jews...  .... Aravindan is correct that each jati arose from the original tribal organization but the inference is that this makes jatis biological constructs. His other statement, drawing upon anthropological data, that some of the Harijans may have been priestly jatis who might have fallen due to real or imagined transgressions is well supported by traditions from these own jatis... ... Now to the controversy. It is true that nurture is as important as nature, but it is undeniable that genetics predisposes you with certain aptitudes... .... Yes, genetic data debunks Aryan invasion circa 1500-1900 BCE. But does it negate or support the possibility of Aryan invasion in an earlier period say 3000 BCE?"  Aravidan Neelakandan specifically responds to K. Venkat's important question on AIT in an earlier time period: "Yes. very definitely it does debunk 'Aryan Invasion' hypothesis even if its placed at 3000 or even 5000 BCE. Again I refer to Appendix-A of the book The study I am referring to for this was done in 2009 (published in Nature:) At the outset the paper seems to support Aryan Invasion model. And in fact a report in Times of India declared that this study supported racial basis of caste and linked it to 2009 session of the UN Human Rights Council at Geneva. However when the authors contacted one of the scientists involved in the project and sought details we were surprised. The ANI (Ancient North Indian) and ASI (Asian South Indian) genetic differences belong to what anthropologists call deep time... " ... Let me quote the words of one of the author of the 'Nature' paper here in full: "Our paper basically discards Aryan theory...." " Chitra goes to Venkat's post and questions him on his statement of Hygiene of certain Jatis: ".. Just curious -- is this something you came up with or is there some basis for this line of thinking?  How does one make a sweeping conclusion that a jati AS A WHOLE lacks a sense of hygiene and is therefore justifiably marginalized?  I ask because I know a fair amount of slobs both female and male who belong to my "caste" and scrupulous neatniks who do not..." Venkat responds to Chitra with two types of evidence to support his statement: " There are clear and unmistakeable references on which I made my inference. But one need not even go into literature and epigraphy and instead make observations on the ground. For example, ... ... Now to a few textual references that support my argument: [references include Manickavasakar, Abbe Dubois, Pawar, and Ziegenbalg] ... I did not say untouchability is justified today. But I would urge every member to look into the causative factors instead of emotionally blaming the so called upper castes. In the past, everyone shared public bathing places etc so hygiene was important. If a jati was not adhering to hygienic standards, its members posed a significant danger to spreading germs and epidemics to others. So, they were avoided. But I never said lack of hygiene was the only factor. There are clearly other factors that led to the ostracizing of an entire jati...

"

... <Chitra's followup question> Is it conceivable that a jati that was marginalized for whatever reason and denied full participation in the mainstream would fall into economic difficulties that made the same level of hygiene difficult?

V: Very much yes. For example, the level of hygiene in refugee camps is appalling even though the same jatis had led a very hygienic existence earlier ...
 ... [In response to Chitra summoning Oscar Wilde]

Oscar Wilde summed up the human condition thus:

"All men are born equal -- but some are more equal than others."

V: Oscar Wilde can sometimes be witty but he is plain wrong and ignorant in this case. Bluntly put, all men are not born equal. This is a phony claim. We are all born with varying capabilities. Hinduism teaches that regardless of such differences everyone deserves to be treated with dignity....

... Since we are discussing untouchability here, please show me that it existed in the pre-Islamic period in Hindu society. We cannot sustain pet theories that have no basis in facts. If you look at inscriptions, the Paraiyah jati is a very dominant jati until the 13th century yet subsequently they fall into untouchability under colonial rule. This is why I will expect that those who claim that Hindu society is guilty of discriminating adduce proof for their beliefs... "

Aravindan Neelakandan commented on one of K.Venkat's references:
"I am afraid KV has misinterpreted the statement of Manichavasakar. This is a self-depreciating poetic statement which can not be taken as a proof of a 'report' of 'the head of the Pulaiya being infested with lice. Here is my informal translation of the statement in its context: .."

Aravindan Neelakandan also mentioned:
"Untouchable is a social space. Any community relegated to that space due to socio-political dynamics will naturally become unhygienic. So to argue untouchability is a result of hygienic factors (or even to argue that hygiene is one of the factors leading to untouchability) is a circular argument.

During the course of the research for this book we came across many genuine Dalit leaders who toil for their community. They are well aware of how forces from the West lure their leadership. They have seen their counterparts given air flights and international forums when they become willing partners in the game. Yet they have kept themselves away. But even these Dalit leaders have a strong grievance and doubt against us. To gain their confidence we had to have many sessions of heart to heart talks. We need to look at history and their notions of why they became untouchables from their point of view. We have attempted that in this book [Breaking India] ..."

Venkat further noted:
"... I want to make a clear distinction between jatis that fell into untouchability and jatis that faced the hostility of the rest of Hindu society. Only a very few jatis among the SC have ever been untouchable. Some of the most powerful jatis such as the Mahar were not untouchable but were seen by Hindu society with hostile eyes. One should ask why..."  

The thread ends with a commentator looking for textual references to Venkat's statement on Mahars.