Karna and the legendary Parsuram

Moral integrity of a potential student was very important to Parsuram. He therefore was right to curse Karna after he found out that Karna had lied to him initially to be accepted as his student. Even, currently, a student getting admitted to an educational program would be kicked out of the program, and even might be blacklisted after graduation, if it is found out that he initially had joined the program under false pretense (e.g. using fake transcripts or recommendation letters etc.).  Btw, Satyakama was admitted by sage Gautama as his student to the education and training of brahmin in spite of Satyakama being a Sudra and a prostitute's child. 

Sevaji,

What was the lie Karna told? Why did he tell that lie?

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

What was the lie Karna told? Why did he tell that lie?

Back in the day, martial schools had to reserve some part of their seats for Brahmins, a Scheduled Caste. In certain minority institutions such as Parashurama Academy, 100% of seats were reserved. Karna forged his SC certificate to get admission, but eventually got caught.

The great martial arts expert Parsuram faced a very hostile and uncertain situation from his enemies, which left him in nomad-like living and made him accept and train students (in martial arts -- archery etc.) from backgrounds similar to his own only, so that they later (after learning martial arts from him) would not pose any threat to him. Karna, who obviously had a different background than Parsuram's and knew about Parsuram's condition for accepting students, went ahead and lied about his background to Parsuram thus duping him into accepting Karna as his student. Parsuram therefore had a legitimate reason to curse / punish Karna later, after finding out that Karna had initially lied to him to get accepted as his student.

Seva Lamberdar wrote:The great martial arts expert Parsuram faced a very hostile and uncertain situation from his enemies, which left him in nomad-like living and made him accept and train students (in martial arts -- archery etc.) from backgrounds similar to his own only, so that they later (after learning martial arts from him) would not pose any threat to him. Karna, who obviously had a different background than Parsuram's and knew about Parsuram's condition for accepting students, went ahead and lied about his background to Parsuram thus duping him into accepting Karna as his student. Parsuram therefore had a legitimate reason to curse / punish Karna later, after finding out that Karna had initially lied to him to get accepted as his student.

You don't have to go insane to justify assholery of Parasurama.

Sevaji,

Decoding your message, Parasuram has a caste based admission to his academy. Karna willingly lied to learn from Parasuram but got caught. Ekalavya never went to Drona but Drona still demanded guru dakshina from him ( that seems like pure false invoicing in today's terms but I digress). Behaviour of Karna and Ekalavya clearly indicates that they were caste based teaching prevailing in those days. Now that kind of rules continued into 20th century.

These trends of early 20th century resulted in many anti caste movements including the dravidian movement. While some of them took extreme political turn, all of them encouraged extension of educational opportunities to all castes. One of the reasons why south is more advanced than north is the extension of educational opportunities and anti caste movements.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Decoding your message, Parasuram has a caste based admission to his academy. Karna willingly lied   to learn from Parasuram but got caught.  Ekalavya never went to Drona but Drona still demanded guru dakshina from him ( that seems like pure false invoicing in today's terms but I digress).  Behaviour of Karna and Ekalavya clearly indicates that they were caste based teaching prevailing in those days.  Now that kind of rules continued into 20th century.  

These trends of early 20th century resulted in many anti caste movements including the dravidian movement.  While some of them took extreme political turn, all of them encouraged extension of educational opportunities to all castes.  One of the reasons why south is more advanced than north is the extension of educational opportunities and anti caste movements.  

what about 'reverse discrimination'? caste based reservations need to come to an end.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Decoding your message, Parasuram has a caste based admission to his academy. Karna willingly lied   to learn from Parasuram but got caught.  Ekalavya never went to Drona but Drona still demanded guru dakshina from him ( that seems like pure false invoicing in today's terms but I digress).  Behaviour of Karna and Ekalavya clearly indicates that they were caste based teaching prevailing in those days.  Now that kind of rules continued into 20th century.  

These trends of early 20th century resulted in many anti caste movements including the dravidian movement.  While some of them took extreme political turn, all of them encouraged extension of educational opportunities to all castes.  One of the reasons why south is more advanced than north is the extension of educational opportunities and anti caste movements.  

These were individual choices and considerations on the part of Parsuram and Dronacharya  (with respect to Karna, after Parsuram almost forced to live like a nomad; and Eklavya, after Dronacharya having faced much economic uncertainty and hardship) for the sake of their personal safety, security and well-being, and not in the interest of the collective or caste. Moreover, the example of sage Gautama imparting knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to Satyakama to become a Brahmin in spite Satyakama being born to a Sudra woman, along with the examples of Valmiki and Vyasa (who became Brahmins and great sages after acquiring knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas in spite of their Sudra connections initially, by birth), confirms that caste was not bound / restricted by birth and that it did not as a rule become hindrance to acquiring knowledge and education (including in Sanskrit and Vedas).

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

What was the lie Karna told? Why did he tell that lie?

There is no need to hide the real history. In Karna's era, caste system was well entrenched. So, Drona trained Kshatriyas in warfare. Since Drona believed that Karna was not a Kshatriya, he refused to train him. In fact, if he were to agree to train Karna - a Soota, or someone else from a similar caste, the society of Drona's time would have been upset with him.

By the time Karna went to Parasurama, he was already rejected by Drona. Since Parasurama was Drona's teacher, Karna thought that he would get even better training from Parasurama. During that time, Parasurama was interested in training only Brahmanas in warfare. So, Karna LIED to Parasurama that he was a Brahmana.

Parasurama had an interesting history. He belongs to the Bhrigu Brahmana clan. Kartaveerya, a Kshatriya, grabs Kamadhenu from Parasurama's father and beats him up for refusing to part with the cow. Parasurama kills Kartaveerya in a battle but Kartaveerya's sons go and kill Parasurama's father when Parasurama was away. Parasurama then decides to eradicate the Kshatriya clan. He actually commits a genocide of Kshatriyas. Any way, in the end, he retires to a mountain and lives like an ascetic......

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

What was the lie Karna told? Why did he tell that lie?

Back in the day, martial schools had to reserve some part of their seats for Brahmins, a Scheduled Caste. In certain minority institutions such as Parashurama Academy, 100% of seats were reserved. Karna forged his SC certificate to get admission, but eventually got caught.

Rohith's mother prayed to the Dalit God (like Kunti did to the Sun God) and declared that her Vaddela son was actually a divine Dalit. Garibi Hatao!

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

What was the lie Karna told? Why did he tell that lie?

There is no need to hide the real history. In Karna's era, caste system was well entrenched. So, Drona trained Kshatriyas in warfare. Since Drona believed that Karna was not a Kshatriya, he refused to train him. In fact, if he were to agree to train Karna - a Soota, or someone else from a similar caste, the society of Drona's time would have been upset with him.

By the time Karna went to Parasurama, he was already rejected by Drona. Since Parasurama was Drona's teacher, Karna thought that he would get even better training from Parasurama. During that time, Parasurama was interested in training only Brahmanas in warfare. So, Karna LIED to Parasurama that he was a Brahmana.

Parasurama had an interesting history. He belongs to the Bhrigu Brahmana clan. Kartaveerya, a Kshatriya, grabs Kamadhenu from Parasurama's father and beats him up for refusing to part with the cow. Parasurama kills Kartaveerya in a battle but Kartaveerya's sons go and kill Parasurama's father when Parasurama was away. Parasurama then decides to eradicate the Kshatriya clan. He actually commits a genocide of Kshatriyas. Any way, in the end, he retires to a mountain and lives like an ascetic......

and Merlot thinks Parsuram was running an academy and making money teaching students!

" Moreover, the example of sage Gautama imparting knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to Satyakama to become a Brahmin in spite Satyakama being born to a Sudra woman, along with the examples of Valmiki and Vyasa (who became Brahmins and great sages after acquiring knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas in spite of their Sudra connections initially, by birth), confirms that caste was not bound / restricted by birth and that it did not as a rule become hindrance to acquiring knowledge and education (including in Sanskrit and Vedas)."

Sevaji,

Read what you wrote.  Satyakama.... to become a brahmin... despite being born to a sudra woman.  Why is there any need for any one to become a brahmin?  Why is brahmin an aspired caste?  Why does one who is born in sudra caste require to learn a lot of knowledge to become a brahmin?  How come those born to brahmins become automatically brahmin without any significant acheivement in knowledge?  If Brahmin is a earned title or honor like a masters degree, why is there a brahmin caste and why do they only intermarry?

The extra ordinary cases of vyasa and valmiki does not prove people were inducted into brahmins or prove that there were regulars cross overs to brahmin caste.  Literary evidence and social practice show that Indian caste, particularly upper castes (brahmins, Vysyas etc) practiced exclusivity and looked down on other castes.  Stories of Karna and Ekalavya were more reflective of the practices of the day and restrictive practices in education of the day.

Your efforts to show that Parasurama or Drona have special reasons to exclude different groups from joining their academy does not pass commonsense test. Do not even talk about anthropological test.

Whatever may be the role of caste in the past, case division and educational exclusivity in industrial age hurt India and hinduism.  Today upper castes have a literacy rate between 80 to 95%, while scheduled castes and tribes literacy is below 50% (in truth it may be in 20 to 30%).
How can a country like India progress without bringing all these people into active economy?  How can you get the SC/ST into economic activities? Education. Only through education and only by making them more productive.

IMO

The core of homo sapiens history, their rise and dominance over other living forms can be summarized in a single word: greed.

the fundamental theme continues to remain the same and the rest are just different expressions/variations of the same theme.

greed includes accumulation of wealth/honor/fame/glory and such, and it necessarily implies finding the mechanisms of securing it for generations. That was dependent on trust which they believed could be largely found only within their own community; it's the dependence on this trust that seemed critical to protect what they had, and hence the inbreeding - this is true of all communities, whatever their individual label might be.

This appears to be the underlying tenet wherein other considerations necessary for harmony and peace within large families like familiarity and ease of communication (same language and culture) played significant roles those days of geographical confinement.

of course, none of this is new.

truthbetold wrote:" Moreover, the example of sage Gautama imparting knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to Satyakama to become a Brahmin in spite Satyakama being born to a Sudra woman, along with the examples of Valmiki and Vyasa (who became Brahmins and great sages after acquiring knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas in spite of their Sudra connections initially, by birth), confirms that caste was not bound / restricted by birth and that it did not as a rule become hindrance to acquiring knowledge and education (including in Sanskrit and Vedas)."

Sevaji,

Read what you wrote.  Satyakama.... to become a brahmin... despite being born to a sudra woman.  Why is there any need for any one to become a brahmin?  Why is brahmin an aspired caste?  Why does one who is born in sudra caste require to learn a lot of knowledge to become a brahmin?  How come those born to brahmins become automatically brahmin without any significant acheivement in knowledge?  If Brahmin is a earned title or honor like a masters degree, why is there a brahmin caste and why do they only intermarry?

The extra ordinary cases of vyasa and valmiki does not prove people were inducted into brahmins or prove that there were regulars cross overs to brahmin caste.  Literary evidence and social practice show that Indian caste, particularly upper castes (brahmins, Vysyas etc) practiced exclusivity and looked down on other castes.  Stories of Karna and Ekalavya were more reflective of the practices of the day and restrictive practices in education of the day.

Your efforts to show that Parasurama or Drona have special reasons to exclude different groups from joining their academy does not pass commonsense test. Do not even talk about anthropological test.

Whatever may be the role of caste in the past, case division and educational exclusivity in industrial age hurt India and hinduism.  Today upper castes have a literacy rate between 80 to 95%, while scheduled castes and tribes literacy is below 50% (in truth it may be in 20 to 30%).
How can a country like India progress without bringing all these people into active economy?  How can you get the SC/ST into economic activities? Education. Only through education and only by making them more productive.

TBT, there was no general need for people to become brahmins. It was simply a personal choice of a person to do so, and if he was thought to be a potentially good and dedicated student (earnest in completing the hard and lengthy education) by the teacher (imparting education in Sanskrit and Vedas, e.g. sage Gautama) he would be accepted as a student (as was the case of Satyakama, in spite of being the son of Sudra woman ...). As for the situations involving Eklavya and Karna, please read the corresponding posts again ... https://such.forumotion.com/t37197-the-legend-of-eklavya-in-the-mahabharata-who-had-to-surrender-his-archer-s-thumb-to-dronacharya-in-lieu-of-guru-dakshina-teaching-fee &  https://such.forumotion.com/t37221-karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram 

More on this, 
http://creative.sulekha.com/karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram_628637_blog

sevaji,

Your inability to answer simple questions is clearly exposed in above posts. You write your opinions with n evidence and claim that as sufficient proof of questions asked.

The basic question was caste system in India divided people and imposed restrictions on certain sections of people. These facts were stated in almost every literary work over the past thousands of years. Literaray research, archaeological studies, historical studies, anthropological studies and societal practices prove groups of people were excluded from knowledge sharing. That is the essence of stories of Karna and Parusurama, and Ekalavya and Drona.

Your revisionist puranic stories does not interest me. They are your opinion and contrary to the puranas widely told and understood in India.

India , just like every other major civilization, had a very hierarchical society. You cannot whitewash that truth.

truthbetold wrote:sevaji,

Your inability to answer simple questions is clearly exposed in above posts.  You write your opinions with n evidence and claim that as sufficient proof  of questions asked.

The basic question was caste system in India divided people and imposed restrictions on certain sections of people.  These facts were stated in almost every literary work over the past thousands of years.  Literaray research, archaeological studies, historical studies, anthropological studies and societal practices prove groups of people were excluded from knowledge sharing.  That is the essence of stories of Karna and Parusurama, and Ekalavya and Drona.  

Your revisionist puranic stories does not interest me.  They are your opinion and contrary to the puranas widely told and understood in India.  

India , just like every other major civilization,  had a very hierarchical society.  You cannot whitewash that truth.

after your usual rant, you can look into the following (a few questions and responses related to this topic on Karna and Parsuram) -- 
http://creative.sulekha.com/karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram_628637_blog?c=2395094#2395094

Sevaji,

I would rather watch grass grow than read your nonsensical dribble. Repeating your arguments without literary, archaeological, genealogical and common sense evidence does not impress any one. If you wish live in your own illusionary world, no one stopped you before. No one would waste their time now.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

I would rather watch grass grow than read your nonsensical dribble.  Repeating your arguments without literary, archaeological, genealogical and common sense evidence does not impress any one.  If you wish live in your own illusionary world, no one stopped you before. No one would waste their time now.    

it's time for you to take up your favorite topic and cause -- "secularism" in India, loaded officially with several religious laws, under threat!

Sevaji,

Over the years I tried to engage you on this topic but you retreated to your oft repeated blogs without providing any evidence. I read some of those blogs and they had no useful information other than your revisionist puranic stories.

Here is the summary of what I see as Indian Caste system history major themes:

Precursor to caste system is the varna system and jatis.

Varna system was based on birth. As it spread across India, it mixed up with tribal cultures of India over centuries. It was western colonists who gave the present name caste system.

All civilizations during the last two or three thousand years had hierarchical societies with large groups of people being discriminated. It is not just a hindu or Indian phenomena. What is peculiar about Indian caste system is its ability to firm up caste or jati or varna as birth characterization and its ability to sustain marriage with in caste.

Scientific research based on literary, archaeological, genealogical, and societal evidence supports that castes have been very insular. The upper castes were more insular than middle and lower castes.

Cross overs such as satyakama, Valmiki and Vyasa were rare and current DNA studies proves exclusivity of these different castes. The cross overs only prove extremely talented were accepted because of their extraordinary situation (they overwhelmed the establishment of the times) but there was no merit based system of people attaining a certain level of skills to be considered as brahmin. Entry to group is exclusively by birth with very rare inclusions from outside.

Whatever may be the merits or utility of caste/Jati/varna system in the earlier centuries, it was not an effective system in last 500 to 800 years. With the advent of printing press and Industrial age, knowledge accumulated fast and came from different parts of societal functions.

Whether it is the cause of India's defeat by muslim invaders and later to western colonists is open for debate. Whether the invaders froze Indian social system's natural evolution or it is the stubbornness of Indian caste system, it is a fact that it is still very much intact.

In the current history, caste system does not play as much role in limiting spread of knowledge. Current big problem is that some individuals and groups exploit the emotional side of caste system to distort democratic process.

In the last hundred years, historical cultural leanings of brahmins contributed positively to India's rapid educational progress among top half of population.Lower half of Indian population has only minimally benefited from Indian economic progress. One contributing factor for Indian poverty is historical division in its society but primary reason is likely to be economic policies of the government. Last 25 years give some hope. In the next 25 years with economic progress, poverty may reduce to a single digit percentage. At that time, with massive urbanization and low poverty, caste system may recede into a cultural relic.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Over the years I tried to engage you on this topic but you retreated to your oft repeated blogs without providing any evidence. I read some of those blogs and they had no useful information other than your revisionist puranic stories.

Here is the summary of what I see as Indian Caste system history major themes:

Precursor to caste system is the varna system and jatis.  ........................

I know where you are coming from and why. I don't need to say more. You are like a guy who has the underwear wrapped on the outside, and if anyone points out it to him then he argues, wants proof and more proof.

Sevaji,

Science is evidence based. So it evolves based on evidence and needs proof and more proof.

Religion is belief based. As time rolls on, reality exposes long held beliefs to be not so believable. For example, Theory of flat , Who is rotating around whom? Sun around earth or the other way?, Man landing on Moon.

Equality of humans is not just a social utopia. Humans are all essentially same and their blood can be transferred from one to another. I am interested in understanding the past to learn from it and participate in building a more better future where all sections of society share the fruits of success.

What you are attempting to do is revise the puranic stories to retell the stories in a way to suit your own opinion. These revised stories are contrary to widely disseminated puranic stories. But that is not my battle.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Science is evidence based. So it evolves based on evidence and needs proof and more proof.

Religion is belief based. As time rolls on, reality exposes long held beliefs to be not so believable. For example, Theory of flat , Who is rotating around whom? Sun around earth or the other way?,  Man landing on Moon.

Equality of humans is not just a social utopia. Humans are all essentially same and their blood can be transferred from one to another. I am interested in understanding the past to learn from it and participate in building a more better future where all sections of society share the fruits of success.  

What you are attempting to do is revise the puranic stories to retell the stories in a way to suit your own opinion. These revised stories are contrary to widely disseminated puranic stories. But that is not my battle.  

You don't require science to tell if someone has "UNDERWEAR" wrapped on the "OUTSIDE".

Sevaji,

Your fascination with underwear can only be matched by your propensity to revise puranic stories. Again that is not an area of my interest. However you have every right to hide behind the underwear.

truthbetold wrote:" Moreover, the example of sage Gautama imparting knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to Satyakama to become a Brahmin in spite Satyakama being born to a Sudra woman, along with the examples of Valmiki and Vyasa (who became Brahmins and great sages after acquiring knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas in spite of their Sudra connections initially, by birth), confirms that caste was not bound / restricted by birth and that it did not as a rule become hindrance to acquiring knowledge and education (including in Sanskrit and Vedas)."

Sevaji,

Read what you wrote.  Satyakama.... to become a brahmin... despite being born to a sudra woman.  Why is there any need for any one to become a brahmin?  Why is brahmin an aspired caste?  Why does one who is born in sudra caste require to learn a lot of knowledge to become a brahmin?  How come those born to brahmins become automatically brahmin without any significant acheivement in knowledge?  If Brahmin is a earned title or honor like a masters degree, why is there a brahmin caste and why do they only intermarry?

The extra ordinary cases of vyasa and valmiki does not prove people were inducted into brahmins or prove that there were regulars cross overs to brahmin caste.  Literary evidence and social practice show that Indian caste, particularly upper castes (brahmins, Vysyas etc) practiced exclusivity and looked down on other castes.  Stories of Karna and Ekalavya were more reflective of the practices of the day and restrictive practices in education of the day.

Your efforts to show that Parasurama or Drona have special reasons to exclude different groups from joining their academy does not pass commonsense test. Do not even talk about anthropological test.

Whatever may be the role of caste in the past, case division and educational exclusivity in industrial age hurt India and hinduism.  Today upper castes have a literacy rate between 80 to 95%, while scheduled castes and tribes literacy is below 50% (in truth it may be in 20 to 30%).
How can a country like India progress without bringing all these people into active economy?  How can you get the SC/ST into economic activities? Education. Only through education and only by making them more productive.

good analysis and good questions, but incomplete. the history of the caste system in india is incomplete without an accounting of the modern (1930-present day) history of the caste system --where the oppressors have been land owning non-brahmin "upper castes" that have declared themselves "backward", exercise phenomenal political power, and have continued to demand reservations over multiple generations despite becoming highly affluent, while also indulging in violence against the SC-ST/dalit castes, especially when their daughters engage in romantic relationships with men of the SC-ST/dalit castes.  to these people, continuing to demonize brahmins is a convenient distraction that takes the focus away from their atrocities.  

so here is another question to add to your list -- when will members of these castes reform themselves and rid themselves of violence, and when will they stop sucking at the teats of the quota system?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
You don't require science to tell if someone has "UNDERWEAR" wrapped on the "OUTSIDE".

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Your fascination with underwear can only be matched by your propensity to revise puranic stories.  Again that is not an area of my interest. However you have every right to hide behind the underwear.

na.. i shouldn't think so...

It looks like TBT and his family (probably brahmin priests) are long time fans of Eklavya and might have used Eklavya's twisted example as an ideal pupil for preaching guru-bhakti and guru-prem (obedience and love for the teacher - read 'holy preacher or pandit') to their audiences. Now they can't stomach the idea that there is more to these ancient stories (about Eklavya and Krana et al.) than their reflecting guru-prem, guru-bhakti and guru-dakshina only. 

As for the education being restricted to some people long ago, that is mostly a myth. Most of the time people did not take to the study of Sanskrit and Vedas, because the process was too tedious and time consuming and not very beneficial financially in the end.  Thus the choice to not study Vedas etc. and become brahmins was their own, and not due to teachers and brahmins. Here is a blog related to this, using some input from Lord Macaulay,
http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog

Sevaji,

I will ignore your inept and immature attempts at sarcasm.

You did say something factual. Many people did not pursue education in past history because it was not financially attractive. However that is not limited to only India. Poor people did not pursue education across the world a thousand years ago. The question is what is the negative impact of denying education to the small number who wanted to learn.

The industrial age brought in thousands of new learners breaking the back of feudal system in west. India remained closeted in its insular system unable to break the back of this backward system even in 21st century.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

truthbetold wrote:" Moreover, the example of sage Gautama imparting knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to Satyakama to become a Brahmin in spite Satyakama being born to a Sudra woman, along with the examples of Valmiki and Vyasa (who became Brahmins and great sages after acquiring knowledge in Sanskrit and Vedas in spite of their Sudra connections initially, by birth), confirms that caste was not bound / restricted by birth and that it did not as a rule become hindrance to acquiring knowledge and education (including in Sanskrit and Vedas)."

Sevaji,

Read what you wrote.  Satyakama.... to become a brahmin... despite being born to a sudra woman.  Why is there any need for any one to become a brahmin?  Why is brahmin an aspired caste?  Why does one who is born in sudra caste require to learn a lot of knowledge to become a brahmin?  How come those born to brahmins become automatically brahmin without any significant acheivement in knowledge?  If Brahmin is a earned title or honor like a masters degree, why is there a brahmin caste and why do they only intermarry?

The extra ordinary cases of vyasa and valmiki does not prove people were inducted into brahmins or prove that there were regulars cross overs to brahmin caste.  Literary evidence and social practice show that Indian caste, particularly upper castes (brahmins, Vysyas etc) practiced exclusivity and looked down on other castes.  Stories of Karna and Ekalavya were more reflective of the practices of the day and restrictive practices in education of the day.

Your efforts to show that Parasurama or Drona have special reasons to exclude different groups from joining their academy does not pass commonsense test. Do not even talk about anthropological test.

Whatever may be the role of caste in the past, case division and educational exclusivity in industrial age hurt India and hinduism.  Today upper castes have a literacy rate between 80 to 95%, while scheduled castes and tribes literacy is below 50% (in truth it may be in 20 to 30%).
How can a country like India progress without bringing all these people into active economy?  How can you get the SC/ST into economic activities? Education. Only through education and only by making them more productive.

good analysis and good questions, but incomplete. the history of the caste system in india is incomplete without an accounting of the modern (1930-present day) history of the caste system --where the oppressors have been land owning non-brahmin "upper castes" that have declared themselves "backward", exercise phenomenal political power, and have continued to demand reservations over multiple generations despite becoming highly affluent, while also indulging in violence against the SC-ST/dalit castes, especially when their daughters engage in romantic relationships with men of the SC-ST/dalit castes.  to these people, continuing to demonize brahmins is a convenient distraction that takes the focus away from their atrocities.  

so here is another question to add to your list -- when will members of these castes reform themselves and rid themselves of violence, and when will they stop sucking at the teats of the quota system?

Max,

I may use different words than you but I share some of the opinions expressed above.

- Reservations were misused by individuals from backward castes.
- an elite class among reservation castes is gaming the system by grabbing multiple generation reservation fruits (denying vast majority of yet to be helped sc/sts future opportunities)
- Brahmins are not the only oppressors in Hindu society. I have said this many times before in such forum, wherever or however the original thought of caste system came to be, other upper castes, warrior castes, farming castes and even backward castes internalized the message and implemented brutal oppression. Brahmins may only have cheer leading role in denial of economic fruits to low castes in 20th and 21st.
- I think dravidian parties use anti Brahminism as a blunt tool to rouse passions among socially minimally enlightened people in Tamil Nadu.

I am lost on that violence bit. You may be commenting with TN politics in mind. I am not well informed in that area.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

I will ignore your inept and immature attempts at sarcasm.

You did say something factual. Many people did not pursue education in past history because it was not financially attractive.  However that is not limited to only India.  Poor people did not pursue education across the world a thousand years ago. The question is what is the negative impact of denying education to the small number who wanted to learn.  

The industrial age brought in thousands of new learners breaking the back of feudal system in west.  India remained closeted in its insular system unable to break the back of this backward system even in 21st century.

What are you saying that a college or a university these days, let's say Harvard University (a private educational outfit currently, similar to a "gurukul" long ago), grants admission to each and every student who applies (submits application or shows up at the door)?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

I will ignore your inept and immature attempts at sarcasm.

You did say something factual. Many people did not pursue education in past history because it was not financially attractive.  However that is not limited to only India.  Poor people did not pursue education across the world a thousand years ago. The question is what is the negative impact of denying education to the small number who wanted to learn.  

The industrial age brought in thousands of new learners breaking the back of feudal system in west.  India remained closeted in its insular system unable to break the back of this backward system even in 21st century.

What are you saying that a college or a university these days, let's say Harvard University (a private educational outfit currently, similar to a "gurukul" long ago), grants admission to each and every student who applies (submits application or shows up at the door)?

Yeah, Sevaji. Harvard should stop turning away people for their race and caste.

Hellsangel wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

I will ignore your inept and immature attempts at sarcasm.

You did say something factual. Many people did not pursue education in past history because it was not financially attractive.  However that is not limited to only India.  Poor people did not pursue education across the world a thousand years ago. The question is what is the negative impact of denying education to the small number who wanted to learn.  

The industrial age brought in thousands of new learners breaking the back of feudal system in west.  India remained closeted in its insular system unable to break the back of this backward system even in 21st century.

What are you saying that a college or a university these days, let's say Harvard University (a private educational outfit currently, similar to a "gurukul" long ago), grants admission to each and every student who applies (submits application or shows up at the door)?

Yeah, Sevaji. Harvard should stop turning away people for their race and caste.

Did you forget to add the lack of money etc., such as not having enough resources or talent and even there the possibility of a threat from the student to Harvard or U.S. later?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

I will ignore your inept and immature attempts at sarcasm.

You did say something factual. Many people did not pursue education in past history because it was not financially attractive.  However that is not limited to only India.  Poor people did not pursue education across the world a thousand years ago. The question is what is the negative impact of denying education to the small number who wanted to learn.  

The industrial age brought in thousands of new learners breaking the back of feudal system in west.  India remained closeted in its insular system unable to break the back of this backward system even in 21st century.

What are you saying that a college or a university these days, let's say Harvard University (a private educational outfit currently, similar to a "gurukul" long ago), grants admission to each and every student who applies (submits application or shows up at the door)?

Yeah, Sevaji. Harvard should stop turning away people for their race and caste.

Did you forget to add the lack of money etc., such as not having enough resources or talent and even there the possibility of a threat from the student to Harvard or U.S. later?

Sevaji, your explanations make me hungry. I always think of Auntie Anne's pretzels when you write them.

Sevaji,

Harvard and poor people: Some socialists (people like Bernie Sanders) think that Harvard type institutions are designed for exclusive use of upper economic strata and people who can be groomed to serve those class of people.

Univ of Chicago people on the other hand say that if family has the same opportunity as the other guy who made lot of money and the rich guy use his money to advantage.

You figure out what you want to think.

Harvard was criticized for limiting the number of jews admitted into its school few decades back. In the past two decades , Harvard and other IVY leagues (and UC Berkely also) placing limits on Asian entrants.

On the other hand, Harvard and most private universities provide federal and private scholarships based on student's ability to pay. While those efforts do not eliminate all hardships for a poor student, many have taken advantage of it to become important contributors to society.

Caste based denial(similar to race based denial) is permanent as one cannot change his or her caste (despite Sevaji's revisionist stories). Economic denial is equally bad but western societies , despite economic discrimination being present, expanded education to nearly 100 % and integrated all most all population in economic activity.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Harvard and poor people:  Some socialists (people like Bernie Sanders) think that Harvard type institutions are designed for exclusive use of upper economic strata and people who can be groomed to serve those class of people.

Univ of Chicago people on the other hand say that if family has the same opportunity as the other guy who made lot of money and the rich guy use his money to advantage.

You figure out what you want to think.

Harvard was criticized for limiting the number of jews admitted into its school few decades back.  In the past two decades , Harvard and other IVY leagues (and UC Berkely also) placing limits on Asian entrants.

On the other hand,  Harvard and most private universities provide federal and private scholarships based on student's ability to pay. While those efforts do not eliminate all hardships for a poor student, many have taken advantage of it to become important contributors to society.

Caste based denial(similar to race based denial) is permanent as one cannot change his or her caste (despite Sevaji's revisionist stories). Economic denial is equally bad but western societies , despite economic discrimination being present, expanded education to nearly 100 % and integrated all most all population in economic activity.  

not true about berkeley.

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Harvard and poor people:  Some socialists (people like Bernie Sanders) think that Harvard type institutions are designed for exclusive use of upper economic strata and people who can be groomed to serve those class of people.

Univ of Chicago people on the other hand say that if family has the same opportunity as the other guy who made lot of money and the rich guy use his money to advantage.

You figure out what you want to think.

Harvard was criticized for limiting the number of jews admitted into its school few decades back.  In the past two decades , Harvard and other IVY leagues (and UC Berkely also) placing limits on Asian entrants.

On the other hand,  Harvard and most private universities provide federal and private scholarships based on student's ability to pay. While those efforts do not eliminate all hardships for a poor student, many have taken advantage of it to become important contributors to society.

Caste based denial(similar to race based denial) is permanent as one cannot change his or her caste (despite Sevaji's revisionist stories). Economic denial is equally bad but western societies , despite economic discrimination being present, expanded education to nearly 100 % and integrated all most all population in economic activity.  

Still having the underwear on the outside? 
You need to go through the following carefully, 
http://creative.sulekha.com/karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram_628637_blog

Btw, why is that some college / Univ. programs these days, even in the U.S. (e.g. R.O.T.C. etc.), are not open to everyone, especially the foreigners? Is it due to some kind of bias (e.g. caste or religion etc.) against the foreigners?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Harvard and poor people:  Some socialists (people like Bernie Sanders) think that Harvard type institutions are designed for exclusive use of upper economic strata and people who can be groomed to serve those class of people.

Univ of Chicago people on the other hand say that if family has the same opportunity as the other guy who made lot of money and the rich guy use his money to advantage.

You figure out what you want to think.

Harvard was criticized for limiting the number of jews admitted into its school few decades back.  In the past two decades , Harvard and other IVY leagues (and UC Berkely also) placing limits on Asian entrants.

On the other hand,  Harvard and most private universities provide federal and private scholarships based on student's ability to pay. While those efforts do not eliminate all hardships for a poor student, many have taken advantage of it to become important contributors to society.

Caste based denial(similar to race based denial) is permanent as one cannot change his or her caste (despite Sevaji's revisionist stories). Economic denial is equally bad but western societies , despite economic discrimination being present, expanded education to nearly 100 % and integrated all most all population in economic activity.  

Still having the underwear on the outside? 
You need to go through the following carefully, 
http://creative.sulekha.com/karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram_628637_blog

Btw, why is that some college / Univ. programs these days, even in the U.S. (e.g. R.O.T.C. etc.), are not open to everyone, especially the foreigners? Is it due to some kind of bias (e.g. caste or religion etc.) against the foreigners?

ROTC? Good example, Sevaji!

Stop calling Karan Karna. It is not the Hindian way. If you have difficulty saying the word, chew pan and say the word while spitting on the road.

Hellsangel wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Sevaji,

Harvard and poor people:  Some socialists (people like Bernie Sanders) think that Harvard type institutions are designed for exclusive use of upper economic strata and people who can be groomed to serve those class of people.

Univ of Chicago people on the other hand say that if family has the same opportunity as the other guy who made lot of money and the rich guy use his money to advantage.

You figure out what you want to think.

Harvard was criticized for limiting the number of jews admitted into its school few decades back.  In the past two decades , Harvard and other IVY leagues (and UC Berkely also) placing limits on Asian entrants.

On the other hand,  Harvard and most private universities provide federal and private scholarships based on student's ability to pay. While those efforts do not eliminate all hardships for a poor student, many have taken advantage of it to become important contributors to society.

Caste based denial(similar to race based denial) is permanent as one cannot change his or her caste (despite Sevaji's revisionist stories). Economic denial is equally bad but western societies , despite economic discrimination being present, expanded education to nearly 100 % and integrated all most all population in economic activity.  

Still having the underwear on the outside? 
You need to go through the following carefully, 
http://creative.sulekha.com/karna-and-the-legendary-parsuram_628637_blog

Btw, why is that some college / Univ. programs these days, even in the U.S. (e.g. R.O.T.C. etc.), are not open to everyone, especially the foreigners? Is it due to some kind of bias (e.g. caste or religion etc.) against the foreigners?

ROTC? Good example, Sevaji!

There are other programs too, e.g. training on missile technology etc., which are not open to students with foreigner status (especially coming from countries deemed as not friendly).

Sevaji,

You seem to suggest any criteria that results some people not being able to qualify for a situation is the same as caste based denial. That is the logical fallacy of your argument. On societal level , one thing that equals caste based discrimination is race based discrimination. In both cases, the discrimination is by birth and permanent.

Discrimination is not wrong by itself. Human progress is based on its ability to discriminate between things that are helpful for progress vs things that hinder development. However, discrimination should be based on evidence and logic. If a mistake is committed by a society that caused harm to a large section of people, that society can only redeem itself by acknowledging its mistakes and correcting them. US attempt to integrate black people and Indian effort to minimize caste system influence are attempts in that direction.

Finally, your undying desire to bring underwear into discussion is not doing any good to your already decimated reputation.