[Advaita-l] Notes on the Musings on the Fundamentals of Hinduism - 7 (II)

Anbu sivam2 anbesivam2 at gmail.com
Sat Sep 12 21:19:59 CDT 2009



The word 'caste' is a misnomer. Caste is a cliché of the secularists, of the
Christians and of the atheists to denigrate Hinduism. Caste is a stereotype
to brand people in bad light. And the word 'varna' should not be equated
with caste as one would be falling in the same trap of the clichés and
stereotypes. Pl. read my topic 'Caste and the Secularist' posted earlier
wherein I have amplified the term ‘Varna'. Can it be said that anyone who
pursues the path of knowledge is a Brahmin; anyone who is ready to fight to
uphold dharma is a Kshatriya? Such a statement appears to be correct on the
face of it, but what is important to know from my topic 'caste and the
secularist' is that a person is made up of a 'guna' that is the driving
force of who he is such as a Brahmana or a Vaisya etc. The significance of
this statement is that it contradicts the secularists' contention that every
person has a choice to belong to whatever ‘varna’ he wants to belong and
since wanting is fickle, a person could want to belong to any and all the
four varnas at different times! The 'guna' is one's innate tendency and it
cannot change. Even his thinking is driven by this 'guna' stuff. The wise
one is content with who he is and enjoys the world and his janma or life
while the not so wise is angry and tries to change the world or himself or
both and gets really messed up. He is often violent in expressing his anger.

The 'varna' is not unique to Hindus, it is actually universal. The Hindus
admit it while others do not. These four varnas are present among, Jews,
Christians, Muslims and anyone else you can name. The varnas are present in
Heaven too! The 'guna' that is the driving force pervades the entire

The general grievance of the secularists is that it is unfair that someone
is a Vaisya or a Sudhra while another is a Kshathriya or a Brahmana. This
stems from their idea that man was created, of course they added the word
'equally’ later! To them everyone looks alike and therefore they are equal.
We call this ‘DEhaathma Buddhi’ the idea that a man is his body and nothing
beyond! However it is for them to ask their creator as to why a person is
created/born blind and mute while another is not, why a person is born a
prince while another is born a pauper. It is for them to ask their creator
why everyone is born a sinner for no fault of his own. I AM TELLING THIS TO
POINT OUT THE POVERTY OF THEIR RELIGION. It is only the Hindus who hold a
view that stands to reason and that is the law of Karma and reincarnation.

According to the Karmic Law your 'poorva karma' or the actions of your
previous incarnations or births brings their fruits called 'karma phala'. If
you were to enjoy something then it is due to your punya karma.
Conversely paapa
Karma brings dhukkam or misery. In order to enjoy and/or suffer the fruits
of karma, you are equipped with such means as your nature, your body, your
mind and your world. Bhagavan Ramana says: "Karthur Aagnaya Praapyathe
Phalam" i.e. by the ordainment of the creator the fruits of karma take
place. These fruits are proportional to what you have done, nothing more,
and nothing less. There is also a byproduct in this: With the body the '
bhoktha' (i.e. the enjoyer or the sufferer) in the process of enjoying or
suffering acquires a taste for the enjoyment or suffering for example the
smell lingering in a flower basket even after the flower is removed or the
onion smell that lingers in your hand even after you have eaten onion sambar
hours ago!. This is called 'samskaara' that a person carries with him. This
enables him to long for another birth to carry on with the tasting yet
again! That is the reason for the claim that the person is born again in his
own family due to his attachment with the members of his family. When you
see a child enjoys/suffers, you can easily infer the result of past karma.
If this is not the case then the child would be suffering something for
which he was never responsible. That is a fault called 'akrutha abyaagamam'.
Also a person does good and bad karma and dies before he enjoys or suffers
the fruit of that karma. If such fruit of karma does not follow him into his
next birth then there arises the fault of 'kritha vibranaasam' i.e. those
karmas getting destroyed without yielding fruit. These faults never arise in
God's ordainment.

The Hindus explain this way why someone is born a prince or a pauper and so
on. Neither the western religions nor the rationalists have any explanation
as to why you are who you are.

Now let us pick up this thread of grievance of the secularists that it is
unfair that someone is a Vaisya or a Sudhra while another is a Kshathriya or
a Brahmana. The secularists and Christians ignore THEIR God’s unequal
creation but would impute it on their fellowmen and clamor to change it.
That is their sense of justice. If you are born once and no more THEN this
grievance is valid, but if you are born again and again due only to your
actions, then you are what you yourself made yourself to be. YOU ARE YOUR

Forgive me for being tedious, the ‘Guna’ of a person changes from birth to
birth but not within each birth. An intriguing question is often posed if a
person also belongs to his Varna by parentage. Most likely yes, for that is
a conducive soil to manifest his Guna but it is certainly not an absolute
truth. Exception is also part of nature.

Please ponder: In this endless travel in time, you and I and all others have
taken many births as Brahmanas and Kshathriyas and Vaisyas and Sudhras and
animals and plants and what else! Why have 'abhimanam' or pride on the caste
you are born in and fight others?  (The answer is it is the work of the guna!)
One gentleman claiming himself to be a Sudhra said the Brahmins have devised
a system that oppressed him.  Who actually were the so called oppressors?
Were they all Brahmins?  The gentleman conceded that that his argument
cannot isolate one varna but all others.  I asked if he came across any
specific person who did oppress him and if so under the law he could take
them to court.  There was no specific person that bothered him but he was
only talking about a system that enabled this discrimination in the past
because of which his community is downtrodden.  I asked him if he considered
the possibility that he could have been a Brahmin or a Kshathriya or a
Vaisya in the past life and could have been responsible for such
'atrocities'?  He knew that if he had to hold the accusation against a
community or communities of the past then he could do so only by giving up
the karma and reincarnation theory!  So he has to be a man of the bilical
religion or atheists that are the components of secularists!

Am I advocating fatalism? Not at all. THE HINDUS MAINTAIN THAT YOU CAN DO
WHAT YOU LIKE. All you need to know is, it is one’s Guna that is at work in
all his actions including liking!"

(to be continued)

Sri Gurubyo Namaha

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list