Rishi wrote:I might remark that the Paraias of South India (yes, those whence the English language has borrowed the word pariah) form a borderline case: they certainly are known for ecstatic drumming and dancing to achieve controlled spirit possession. Their distinctive tradition stands out against Vedic Hinduism as much closer to Shamanism. Till recently, they were kept at a distance by Brahmin priests as “untouchables” not because they were despised (though they may have been that too) but because they were feared, viz. for carrying with them the world of the spirits and the dead.

http://centreright.in/2013/03/koenraad-elst-witzel-myths/#.UT_s7dZ_CSp

Kris wrote:

Rishi wrote:I might remark that the Paraias of South India (yes, those whence the English language has borrowed the word pariah) form a borderline case: they certainly are known for ecstatic drumming and dancing to achieve controlled spirit possession. Their distinctive tradition stands out against Vedic Hinduism as much closer to Shamanism. Till recently, they were kept at a distance by Brahmin priests as “untouchables” not because they were despised (though they may have been that too) but because they were feared, viz. for carrying with them the world of the spirits and the dead.

http://centreright.in/2013/03/koenraad-elst-witzel-myths/#.UT_s7dZ_CSp

>>> This is giving too much credit to Brahmins in suggesting they had some rationale for untouchability. It is more a case of unquestioned bigotry. Incidentally, the hierarchical view of people by birth is not limited to just a few castes. It permeates hinduism and to some extent even certain christians and muslims..

Uppili wrote:

Kris wrote:

Rishi wrote:I might remark that the Paraias of South India (yes, those whence the English language has borrowed the word pariah) form a borderline case: they certainly are known for ecstatic drumming and dancing to achieve controlled spirit possession. Their distinctive tradition stands out against Vedic Hinduism as much closer to Shamanism. Till recently, they were kept at a distance by Brahmin priests as “untouchables” not because they were despised (though they may have been that too) but because they were feared, viz. for carrying with them the world of the spirits and the dead.

http://centreright.in/2013/03/koenraad-elst-witzel-myths/#.UT_s7dZ_CSp

>>> This is giving too much credit to Brahmins in suggesting they had some rationale for untouchability. It is more a case of unquestioned bigotry. Incidentally, the hierarchical view of people by birth is not limited to just a few castes. It permeates hinduism and to some extent even certain christians and muslims..

To be PiC: it extends to Christianity, Islam, Budhism, Sikhism, Whites, hispanics, blacks, Japs, Chinkus, Koreans, and everyone.

Evidence: the story of the recently dead Princess Lilian of Sweeden, who was isolated all through her life for belonging to ordinary folks.

Rishi wrote:Kris,


1. First, I posted the passage in which the author theorized as to why brahmins shunned pariahs.

2. You said it was pure bigotry. An then said "Incidentally, the hierarchical view of people by birth is not limited to just a few castes. It permeates hinduism and to some extent even certain christians and muslims.."

3. Then Uppili expanded on your last statement and said "it extends to Christianity, Islam, Budhism, Sikhism, Whites, hispanics, blacks, Japs, Chinkus, Koreans, and everyone".

4. Then you turn around and tell him "but the passage quoted above pertains to brahmins".

Does it make sense?

Rishi wrote:I might remark that the Paraias of South India (yes, those whence the English language has borrowed the word pariah) form a borderline case: they certainly are known for ecstatic drumming and dancing to achieve controlled spirit possession. Their distinctive tradition stands out against Vedic Hinduism as much closer to Shamanism. Till recently, they were kept at a distance by Brahmin priests as “untouchables” not because they were despised (though they may have been that too) but because they were feared, viz. for carrying with them the world of the spirits and the dead.

http://centreright.in/2013/03/koenraad-elst-witzel-myths/#.UT_s7dZ_CSp

trofimov wrote:

Rishi wrote:I might remark that the Paraias of South India (yes, those whence the English language has borrowed the word pariah) form a borderline case: they certainly are known for ecstatic drumming and dancing to achieve controlled spirit possession. Their distinctive tradition stands out against Vedic Hinduism as much closer to Shamanism. Till recently, they were kept at a distance by Brahmin priests as “untouchables” not because they were despised (though they may have been that too) but because they were feared, viz. for carrying with them the world of the spirits and the dead.

http://centreright.in/2013/03/koenraad-elst-witzel-myths/#.UT_s7dZ_CSp

Koenraad Elst: making up excuses for untouchability, violence, and anything else, as long as it is done by and in the name of Hinduism. His "theory" reminds me of a theory my guruvu-gaaru once came up with to "explain" untouchability, using the germ theory of disease. Elstji should meet Sevaji and my guruvu-gaaru; together they can save Hinduism from all the ignorant youngsters who think there may be some bad elements in Hinduism.