Caste system:A New Perspective
Caste system:A New Perspective
by Maanoj Rakhit
Every time the word Caste System is uttered it puts Hindus on the defensive
Centuries long Christian missionary propaganda followed by CommunistMarxist intermittent offensive has made the word Caste a dreaded one for the Hindus. Therefore, anti-Hindus and self-professed Hindu reformers do not miss an opportunity to drop this dreaded word Caste whenever they want Hindus to take a retreat. Bhaaratiya Christianized media makes it a point to constantly keep this word Caste into focus every now and then as if Hinduism and Caste system were synonymous. Given this scenario, I urge you to think about it differently.
The very thought of Caste system triggers an image in your mind that feels like an epitome of Social Injustice
If Hindu society practiced social injustice at such massive scale as it is made out to be then all those foreign visitors must have noticed it and mentioned it. But what did they do? Each of them invariably praised Hindu Justice.
Now, it is a matter of plain common sense that the following two contradictions cannot simply exist together. One that Hindu society practiced gross social injustice. Other that Hindu justice and love for truth were unmatched by any civilization of which any such documentation is available.
Naturally, one of them is the liar but which one? Either all those foreign visitors from 4th century BC onwards joined together from their graves to conspire and praise Hindu justice and its love for truth. Or all those Christian missionary educators conspired to systematically tarnish the image of Hinduism. And all those Christian educators harvested new crops of educators, generation after generation, which continued to carry out the legacy of those liars and conspirers.
Now this happens to be only one aspect of the massive conspiracy and social fraud committed by them. As you will proceed through this work and other works of mine you will see on how many fronts they have worked to destroy a civilization that was superior to their own. As they could not raise themselves to the level of this great civilization, they chose to pull it down below the level of their own. They worked at it systematically and consistently spreading their wings in every possible direction to consign this great civilization to the oblivion. And, as you will read their own admissions, the most amazing thing that you will learn is that it was not their nationality which drove them to do so but their religious faith lead them to destroy this civilization. If you truly believe that Caste system is the biggest Curse on Hinduism and that it destroyed Hinduism then I invite you to use your head that the Creator of this Universe has place on your shoulder and think about what I have to say.
What does the very thought of Caste system represent? Does it not speak of Gross Social Injustice towards a very large section of Humanity?
If yes, then let that be the premise on which you hold your believe system and let me challenge that very premise of yours. You have been told by your educators how bad Caste system is. You keep on reading and hearing different kinds of news items presented by the media on a regular basis that keep cementing your thought process that Caste system, indeed, is the nuisance.
So let us examine your belief system that the Caste system is an evil so far a social structure is concerned
And before you proceed you must remember that this particular thought process has been inducted into Hindu psyche only 170 years ago when the rural based ancient Hindu education system was eliminated from roots and replaced by urban based Christian Missionary education system in 1835 which had a specific mission, and that was to convert English educated Hindus into non-idolater so that the first brick can be laid firmly towards building a ChristianizedHindu society.
That was what Macaulay, again, summarized best when he proudly wrote his father in 1836: Macaulay: Our English schools are flourishing wonderfully ... It is my belief that if our plans of education are followed up, there will not be a single idolater among the respectable classes in Bengal thirty years hence. [Michel Danino, Effects of Colonization on Indian Thought quoted in IndiaCause Newsletter 17 Aug 2003]
Now I invite you to take a special note of the fact that all the testimonies that I am going to present hereafter are (a) not by people who had a specific mission (b) not by people who subscribed to a single ideology (c) not by people who were part of a single theology (d) not by people who were in any way connected with each other by an invisible thread (e) not by people who had any reason to carry any special leaning in favor of the Hindus (f) not by people who could be accused by any stretch of imagination that they were working together towards building a specific image of the Hindus.
On the other hand, as you will proceed through this work you will come to notice very clearly that the opposite of this can be attributed to those people who have been consistently working at tarnishing the image of the Hindus. I would not expect you to be impartial because your minds have been preprogrammed by your educators and media exposures. Yet if you have some ability left with you to think on your own instead of being guided by interested parties then you will be able to see some light. But if you cannot I would not blame you any further. I would simply let it go realizing that you have been brainwashed beyond repair.
Hindu society’s foundation was based on 4-Varn System: Braahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shoodr Varn. 16th century Christian missionaries coined a new term for this: Caste system. Let us see why they did it
Caste is not a Bhaaratiya word but a derogatory epithet introduced by Portuguese (*Christian) Missionaries in the 16th century to describe the Hindu society. [N S Rajaram, p 161]
Christian missionaries soon found out that Hindus would not trust them as they trusted Braahmans. They also realized that they could not even dream to bring themselves up to the level of Braahmans. They could think of only one way that happened to have become their second nature since the very inception of Christianity. That is Intellectual, Historical and Social Frauds [see Christianity in a different Light Volume II]. So they decided to tarnish the image of Braahmans.
Xavier wrote in another letter to the Society of Jesus: If it were not for the Braahmans, we should have all the heathens embracing our faith. [Sita Ram Goel, St Francis Xavier, The Man and His Mission, quoted by Ishwar Sharan, p 80]
19th century Macaulay introduced Christian Missionary English education system in BhaaratVarsh. Christian educators slowly poisoned the minds of unsuspecting Hindu children against Braahmans [see Do your history books tell you these facts].
20th century Nehru dynasty pampered MarxistFakeSecularist educators who continued the process with greater enthusiasm. Education system, news media, magazines, cinema, and every other possible medium of communication to people were used. With continued repetition every one came to believe that Hindu society practiced gross social injustice in the name of Caste system.
Hard Facts of undeniable authenticity
Now look at these documented testimonies that give you a totally opposite picture. These testimonies were carefully kept out of your view for long, though they existed all along! You must read them and ask yourself a question: Can the foundation of Hindu society be based on gross social injustice when "justice and truthfulness" has been the lifeblood of the Hindu Society through the ages?
Now, it is quite true that during the two thousand years which precede the time of Mahmoud of Ghazni, BhaaratVarsh has had but (*not) few foreign visitors, and few foreign critics; still it is extremely strange that whenever, either in Greek, or in Chinese, or in Persian, or in Arab writings, we meet any attempts at describing the distinguishing features in the national character of the Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus), regard for truth and justice should always be mentioned first. [Max Muller, p 50]
Just find me any account of love for truthfulness and justice in the entire history of Christian societies. The condition is that you have to find it not from what they write about themselves but what others have written about them; the same way as I am presenting you the evidence not from what Hindus have written about themselves but what others have written about them.
The term ‘Bhaaratiya’ refers to Hindus in all these statements and should not be confused unduly. Even Max Muller has titled the whole chapter as Truthful Character of the Hindus.
Friedrich Max Muller fills 37 pages with examples of Hindu Justice and Hindu love for Truth and he says that he can go on quoting many-many more. To top it he has titled the chapter as Truthful Character of the Hindus in his book INDIA what can it teach us?
Do you think a society could have all along practiced gross social injustice towards its own people, a society whose "whole literature from one end to the other" is pervaded by expressions of love and reverence for truth?
I have left to the last of the witness who might otherwise have been suspected – I mean the Hindus themselves. The whole of their literature from one end to the other is pervaded by expressions of love and reverence for truth. [Max Muller, p 59]
Look at the literature of the Christian societies and see how well the character of that society is reflected through their literature. If there has been any kind of gross social injustice towards humanity you do not have to look any where else, you will find it right there in the history of Christian societies only if you have studied them sufficiently well. However, if you base your notions on what they show you then I am sorry to say, you have to learn lot more of their deceptive character and deceitful nature.
Hindu Justice could not have been "exemplary" to the Greeks of 5th century BC if Hindu social structure was truly based on a system of gross social injustice towards the vast majority of its own people. This is nothing but plain logic
Ktesias, the famous Greek physician of Artaxerxes Mnemon (present at the battle of Cunaxa, 404 BC), the first Greek writer who tells us anything about the character of the Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus), such as he heard it described at the Persian court, has a special chapter "On the justice of the Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus)". [Ktesiae Fragmenta (ed. Didot), p 81 quoted by Max Muller, p 51 p 230]
Now tell me, how is it that Megasthenes documented in 4th century BC that "no Hindu was a slave" in a society that practiced gross social injustice in form of infamous Caste system?
Megasthenes, the ambassador of Selucus Nicator at the court of Sandrocottus in Palibothra (PaataliPutr, the modern Patna), states that thefts were extremely rare, and they honored truth as virtue. [Indian Antiquary, 1876, p 333 Megasthenis Fragmenta (ed. Didot) in Fragm. Histor. Graec. Vol. ii. p 426 quoted by Max Muller, p 51 p 231]
Megasthenes, for example, who visited the Maurya court at PaataliPutr in the 4th century BC, noted: All Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus) are free, and none of them is a slave... Further, they respect alike virtue and truth... [Michel Danino, p 23 referring to Megasthenes, quoted by Greek historians Arrian and strabo, in R C Majumdar, The Classical Accounts of India (Calcutta: Firma KLM, 1981), pp 224, 218, 270]
Slavery and gross social injustice in one form or the other has been rampant in Christian societies, and those very people have been pointing finger at our Hindu society.
The "Hindu self-governance" that Arrian spoke of in the 2nd century happened to be a superior form of peoples’ democracy as compared to the present day manipulative democracy. And when he spoke of "Hindus never lie" you need to understand first what kind of character is needed for that. If you are capable of visualizing the quality of that character then you will have no trace of doubt left that collectively such people could NOT have practiced for millenniums the so-called gravest social injustice on the face of this earth
Arrian (in the 2nd century, the pupil of Epictetus), when speaking of the public overseers or superintendents in (*Hindu) BhaaratVarsh, says: They oversee what goes on in the country or towns, and report everything to the king, where the people have a king, and to the magistrates, where the people are self-governed, and it is against use and wont for these to give in a false report; but indeed no Bhaaratiya (*Hindu) is accused of lying. [Indica, cap. xii. 6. McCrindle in Indian Antiquary, 1876, p 92 quoted by Max Muller, p 51 p 231]
How is it that a society, accused of practicing gross social injustice towards its own people, has been praised by Hiouen-thsang in the 7th century putting it on record "with regard to justice, Hindus make even excessive concessions"? Think for a moment about the people who "never grabbed anything unjustly" from other peoples’ wealth, would they have practiced gross social injustice towards the same very people? And again, think, the people who made "excessive concessions with regard to justice" would they have practiced gross social injustice towards own people?
"The Chinese, who come next in order of time, bear the same, believe, unanimous testimony in favor of the honesty and veracity (*truthfulness) of the Hindus. Let me quote Hiouen-thsang, the most famous of the Chinese Buddhist pilgrims, who visited India in 7th century. "Though the Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus)," he writes, "are of a light temperament, they are distinguished by the straightforwardness and honesty of their character. With regard to riches, they never take anything unjustly; with regard to justice, they make even excessive concessions … Straightforwardness is the distinguishing feature of their administration". [Max Muller, p 51]
You must realize one thing clearly: if you mix light and darkness together they can never coexist. The light will dispel darkness or the darkness will engulf the light. They can coexist only in small measures together. For instance, throughout darkness there can be one lamp giving little bit of light. Or, in an array of light there may a small corner where darkness prevails because light does not penetrate there. But it is not possible that abundance of light and immense magnitude of darkness can stay together at one place. It is simply not possible. Much the same such abundance of love for truth and justice and such immense magnitude of social injustice as depicted through Caste system could not have stayed together. Only one of them could be true not both simultaneously.
Once again, it has been said by Idrisi in the 11th century that "Hindus are naturally inclined to justice and never depart from it in their actions". How could they have allowed social injustice of the kind that they were accused of by Christian educators and Communist educators?
If we turn to the accounts given by the Mohammedan conquerors of BhaaratVarsh, we find Idrisi, in his Geography (written in the 11th century), summing up their opinion of the Bhaaratiyas in the following words: "The Bhaaratiyas are naturally inclined to justice, and never depart from it in their actions. Their good faith, honesty, and fidelity to their engagements are well known, and they are so famous for these qualities that people flock to their country from every side". [Elliot, History of India, vol. i. p 88 quoted by Max Muller, pp 51-52, p 231]
Were they educators of lies? What was their profession? Was it to fill their students’ heads with lies? And why did they hide all such information that could have told the Hindus that they were all born liars?
Here you see Marco Polo in the 13th century describing "Braahmans as the most truthful for they would not tell a lie for anything on earth". And, those very same Braahmans have been accused of all kinds of social jugglery and were termed as most wicked among the Hindus
In the 13th century we have the testimony of Marco Polo, who thus speaks of Abraiaman, a name by which he seems to mean the Braahmans who, though not traders by profession, might have been employed for great commercial transactions by the king. This was particularly the case during times which the Braahmans would call times of distress, when many things were allowed which at other times were forbidden by the laws. "You must know," Marco Polo, says, "that these Abraiaman are the best merchants in the world, and the most truthful, for they would not tell a lie for anything on earth". [Marco Polo, ed. H. Yule, vol. ii. p 350 quoted by Max Muller, p 52 p 231]
Now ask yourself, who have been lying all along? These people from different origins, from different centuries, who came and visited the Hindus and came to invariably the same conclusion? Or, Christian missionaries who had the hidden agenda to convert Hindus into Christianity by hook or crook? Or, CommunistMarxist historians of AMU and JNU who had a hidden agenda to spread their wings so they could keep their illegitimately acquired hold over Hindu society? All fraudsters have a brotherhood kind of feeling and they support each other. This is what these Christians and Communists had been doing but simpleton Hindus did not see through their foul play. Wake up my Hindu nation and try to understand their game plan
On the other hand, only three centuries later, the Saint of Christianity name Francis Xavier of 16th century (we will soon see what other people of 16th century have to say) calls Hindu Braahmans as perverse, wicked and crafty men and terms all Hindus as unholy race. Such happens to be the character of a Saint of Christianity. So, you can well imagine what would be the character of the lesser ones than a Saint.
Xavier wrote in another letter to the Society of Jesus, "There are in these parts among the pagans a class of men called Braahmans. They are as perverse and wicked a set as can anywhere be found, and to whom applies the Psalm, which says: ‘From an unholy race, and wicked and crafty men, deliver me, Lord.’’ Xavier wrote in another letter to the Society of Jesus: If it were not for the Braahmans, we should have all the heathens embracing our faith. [Sita Ram Goel, St Francis Xavier, The Man and His Mission, quoted by Ishwar Sharan, p 80]
When their ulterior motives are not fulfilled they tarnish the image of others and in doing so they reveal their own ‘wicked and crafty nature’. The same applies to the ChristianEnglish educated ChristianizedHindus and CommunistMarxist thinkers who adopted such questionable methods to raise their own social status by fraudulently reducing others.
Bedi Ezr Zenan in the 13th century spoke of "Hindus Free of all deceit and violence". But Hindu Braahmans have been accused by Christians and Communists for deceit and violence in form of gross social injustice!
Again in the 13th century, Shems-ed din Abu Abdallah quotes the following judgment of Bedi Ezr Zenan: "The Bhaaratiyas are innumerable, like grains of sand, free from all deceit and violence. They fear neither death nor life." [Mehren, Manuel de la Cosmographie du moyen age, traduction de Shems-ed-din Abou Abdallah de Damas, Paris, Leroux, 1874, p 391 quoted by Max Muller, p 257]
Friar Jordanus in the 14th century speaks of "Hindus True in Speech and Eminent in Justice". But same Hindus are accused of gross social injustice by our Christian educators and Marxist intellectuals.
In the 14th century we have Friar Jordanus, who goes out of his way to tell us that the people of Lesser BhaaratVarsh (South and Western) are true in speech and eminent in justice." [Marco Polo, ed. H. Yule, vol. ii. p 350 quoted by Max Muller, p 52 p 231]
Must you continue to respect these liars who committed social fraud on you? Ask Hindus, ask yourself. Don’t you owe at least, that much to yourself? How long do you want to live under the spell of these crooks that taught you nothing but lie and called themselves as educators and intellectuals?
Akbar’s Muslim Minister Abul Fazl in the 16th century spoke of "Hindu Justice, Truthfulness, and never fly from the battlefield type of character". And, what these Christian educators have taught you all along, that, Hindus were so much divided all the time that they could not face the Muslims. Besides, lowering your self-esteem what else have they given you? Have they given you the knowledge that has benefited you, or have they cheated on you while maintaining a poker face all the while?
In the 16th century, Abul Fazl, the minister of the Emperor Akbar, says in his Aayine Akbari: "The Hindus are religious, affable, cheerful, lovers of justice, given to retirement, able in business, admirers of truth, grateful and of unbounded fidelity; and their soldiers know not what it is to fly from the field of battle." [Samuel Johnson, India, p. 294 quoted by Max Muller, p 52 p 231]
Max Muller compares "legendary Hindu honesty with English and French, and finds it superior to the Europeans". He also mentioned that he can go on quoting book after book and you will find that "no one ever accused Hindus of falsehood". Think, my dear fellows, think, can the Truthfulness of this magnitude survive in a society allegedly ridden with social injustice? Or, the allegation itself has been fraudulent, and a fabrication with ulterior motive?
So I could go on quoting from book after book, and again and again we should see how it was the love of truth that struck all the people who came in contact with BhaaratVarsh, as the prominent feature in the national character of its inhabitants. No one ever accused them of falsehood. There must surely be some ground for this, for it is not a remark that is frequently made by travelers in foreign countries, even in our time, that their inhabitants invariably speak the truth. Read the accounts of English travelers in France, and you will find very little said about French honesty and veracity, while French accounts of England are seldom without a fling at Perfide Albion! Max Muller, p 53
We will deal with those motives, in detail, in our other books. You will see from historical evidence that historical frauds have been so common with Christianity from its very inception that it has become the second nature of Christianity as a religion and those people who practice it.
Warren Hastings [First Governor General of ChristianBritish BhaaratVarsh 1774-1784] spoke of the "Hindus as less prompted to Vengeance for Wrong Inflicted than any people on the face of the earth". This is probably the reason that Hindus continue to tolerate these fraudsters, who have perpetrated social fraud of such magnitude that they have destroyed a great civilization that lasted thousands of years until these crooks arrived on the scene. Expect me not to use better adjectives for them. They should be identified as they have been and as they are.
Warren Hastings thus spoke of Hindus in general: "They are gentle and benevolent, more susceptible of gratitude for kindness shown to them, and less prompted to vengeance for wrongs inflicted than any people on the face of the earth; faithful, affectionate, submissive to legal authority." Max Muller, p 56
Bishop Heber spoke of "Hindus as more easily affected by kindness and attention to their wants and feelings than any people he ever met with". This is probably the reason that Hindus respected Christianity looking at handful of honest Christians like these counted few
"The Hindus are brave, courteous, intelligent, most eager for knowledge and improvement; sober, industrious, dutiful to parents, affectionate to their children, uniformly gentle and patient, and more easily affected by kindness and attention to their wants and feelings than any people I ever met with". Max Muller, p 56, endnote 38 referring to Samuel Johnson, l. c. p 293
Elphinstone, the Governor of the Bombay Presidency, spoke of "Hindus as more merciful to prisoners than any other Asiatic and their freedom from gross debauchery". People who are merciful and who live a life of purity, they do not indulge into the kind of gross social injustice they have been accused of, by Christian educators and CommunistMarxist educators
The Hindus are mild and gentle people, more merciful to prisoners than any other Asiatics. Their freedom from gross debauchery is the point in which they appear to most advantage; and their superiority in purity of manners is not flattering to our self-esteem. [Elphinstone’s History of India, ed. Cowell, p. 213 quoted by Max Muller, p 56 p 231]
Sir Thomas Munro, the eminent Governor of Madras Presidency, spoke that "Hindus were not inferior to the nations of Europe and he was convinced that England had more to gain if Civilization became an article for trade between BhaaratVarsh and England". Do you think Sir Thomas Munro would have said something like this if our Hindu society was ridden with social injustice of the kind these Christian and Marxist educators have told us, and told the world?
Sir Thomas Munro bears even stronger testimony. He writes: "If a good system of agriculture, unrivalled manufacturing skill, a capacity to produce whatever can contribute to either convenience or luxury, schools established in every village for teaching, reading, writing, and arithmetic, the general practice of hospitality and charity amongst each other, and above all, a treatment of the female sex full of confidence, respect, and delicacy, are among the signs which denote a civilized people – then the Hindus are not inferior to the nations of Europe, and if civilization is to become an article of trade between England and BhaaratVarsh, I am convinced that England will gain by the import cargo." [Sir Thomas Munro, Mill’s History, vol. i. p. 371 quoted Max Muller, p 57 p 231]
Prof Wilson spoke of "Hindu Honesty at Calcutta Mint superior to mints in other countries". Do you think that a society, which cannot have any social justice within its own social framework, can be made of people, commonly so very honest, as indicated here?
Max Muller continued: I knew the late Professor Wilson, our Boden Professor of Sanskrit at Oxford, for many years, and often listened with deep interest to his reminiscences. Let me read you what he, Professor Wilson, says of his native friends, associates, and servants: ‘I lived, both from necessity and choice, very much amongst the Hindus, and had opportunities of becoming acquainted with them in a greater variety of situations than those in which they usually come under the observation of Europeans. In the Calcutta mint, for instance, I was in daily personal communication with a numerous body of artificers, mechanics, and laborers, and always found amongst them cheerful and unwearied industry, good-humored compliance with the will of their superiors, and a readiness to make whatever exertions were demanded from them: there was among them no drunkenness, no disorderly conduct, no insubordination. It would not be true to say that there was no dishonesty, but it was comparatively rare, invariably petty, and much less formidable than, I believe, it is necessary to guard against in other mints in other countries. There was considerable skill and ready docility. So far from there being any servility, there was extreme frankness, and I should say that where there is confidence without fear, frankness is one of the most universal features in the Indian character. Let the people feel sure of the temper and goodwill of their superiors, and there is an end of reserve and timidity, without the slightest departure from respect…’ Max Muller, pp 37-38.
Prof Wilson spoke of Braahman Simplicity truly Childish. Do you think that these Braahmans could have been credited with such childish simplicity if they happened to be such dirty people, who were alleged to have created this treacherous Caste system for their own benefit? Prof Wilson clarifies further that where that simplicity truly childish was lost it was on account of long association with the Europeans. So you see what a bad company can do to anyone!
Then, speaking of much-abused Bhaaratiya Pundits, he says: ‘The studies which engaged my leisure brought me into connection with the men of learning, and in them I found the similar merits of industry, intelligence, cheerfulness, frankness, with others peculiar to their avocation. A very common characteristic of these men and of the Hindus especially, was simplicity truly childish, and a total unacquaintance with the business and manners of life. Where that feature was lost, it was chiefly by those who had been long familiar with Europeans. Amongst the Pundits, or the learned Hindus, there prevailed great ignorance and great dread of the European character. There is indeed, very little intercourse between any class of Europeans and Hindu scholars, and it is not wonderful, therefore, that mutual misapprehension should prevail.’ Max Muller, pp 38-39
The products of such bad company were Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, Pundit Sunder Lal, M N Roy, and many such celebrities. How they worked towards destroying Hindu heritage is something you need to read in my other works.
In the 13th century Italian Marco Polo had given testimony that Hindu Braahmans were most truthful and they would not tell a lie for anything on this earth. Three centuries later in the 16th century Spanish Christian Saint calls the Braahmans as perverse, wicked and crafty. Three centuries further down the line in the 19th century British Prof Wilson testifies the childlike simplicity of Hindu Braahmans.
Xavier could not convert all Hindus into Christianity. His ulterior motive was hurt. So, he painted Braahmans in such bad light. His successors did the same thing.
Xavier wrote in another letter to the Society of Jesus: If it were not for the Braahmans, we should have all the heathens embracing our faith. [Sita Ram Goel, St Francis Xavier: The Man and His Mission quoted by Ishwar Sharan, p 80]
Later day missionary educated Hindus parroted what their teachers had taught them. Realize that you have learned the falsehood from your Christian educators and you have spread that falsehood further through television serials, movies, newspapers, etc. Now you must stop and reverse that process, for which you too are responsible to a good extent but only as the pawns in the hands of those master conspirators, who fooled you and cheated you all along. If any one is to be despised, it is not Braahmans but these cheats called Christian educators and CommunistMarxist educators
Colonel Sleeman has put on records that he had before him hundreds of cases, in which a man’s property, liberty, and life depended upon his telling a lie, and he refused to tell it. Max Muller then asks: Can many an English judge say the same? Could our so-called wretched Caste system and a socially unjust society have produced such truthful Hindus incomparable elsewhere?
Colonel Sleeman saw BhaaratVarsh, where alone the true BhaaratVarsh can be seen, namely, in the village-communities… In their PanchAayats [village self-governance], Sleeman tells us, men adhere habitually and religiously to the truth, and ‘I have had before me hundreds of cases,’ he says, ‘in which a man’s property, liberty, and life depended upon his telling a lie, and he has refused to tell it.’ Could many an English judge say the same? [Colonel Sleeman’s Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, published in 1844 but written originally in 1835-36 quoted by Max Muller, pp 46-47]
Do you realize the significance of this sentence: Can many an English judge say the same? By deductive logic, if the outcome was so great, then the foundation also had to be equally great. And, that foundation was the 4-Varn System. People with vested interest speak against it. People of ignorance keep parroting the same. Today, if we do not see any trace of such legendary truthfulness among the Hindus, it is because these Hindus have become ChristianizedHindus, under the very bad influence of six generations of ChristianEnglish Education System, a topic that I have dealt with in great detail in my other works
Max Muller says that for past two thousand years Greeks, Chinese, Persian, Arabs, all described the "most distinguishing feature of Hindu society as its regard for truth and justice", but for two hundred years ChristianEnglish education system taught Hindus that the most distinguishing feature of Hindu society was its social injustice in form of 4-Varn System, which they renamed as caste system. Were these Christian educationists lying all along? Was their lie part of a much bigger conspiracy against Hindu society? Was it to bleed Hindu society to death?
Max Muller continues: Now, it is quite true that during the two thousand years which precede the time of Mahmoud of Ghazni, BhaaratVarsh has had but (*not) few foreign visitors, and few foreign critics; still it is extremely strange that whenever, either in Greek, or in Chinese, or in Persian, or in Arab writings, we meet any attempts at describing the distinguishing features in the national character of the Bhaaratiyas (*Hindus), regard for truth and justice should always be mentioned first. [Max Muller, p 50]
Again please notice what he says "we meet any attempts at describing the distinguishing features in the national character of the Hindus, regard for truth and justice should always be mentioned first". Those who accuse Hindu society of gross social injustice in the name of Caste system, let them explain how all these people could have witnessed such high regard for Justice?
Let me add that I have been repeatedly told by English merchants that commercial honor stands higher in BhaaratVarsh than in any other country, and that a dishonored bill is hardly known there. Max Muller, p 58
English Merchants spoke that "commercial Honor stood higher in BhaaratVarsh than in any other country". Why we do not see any evidence of it today? Is it because Christian educators have completely ruined the sense of ethics amongst Hindus? Educators, who themselves posses no ethics, what else can they pass on to their pupil? If they themselves were not truthful, and their sole purpose behind replacing ancient Hindu education system was to break the backbone of Hindu society, then how could you expect to learn anything about justice from them?
You must understand this basic fact: if the foundation is based on fraud, its outcome will also be fraud. In this context, ChristianEnglish education system’s foundation was based on fraud against Hindu society. Their purpose was ignoble. Their intentions were conspiratorial. There was simply no regard for truth and justice in their belief system.
Therefore, they produced crops like themselves. Students of their education system, through next six generations, gradually continued to become fraudulent like their teachers. They lost regard for truth and justice that happened to be cherished Ethos of Hindu society until two centuries ago!
If you wish to know how Christianity manages that wonderful task, you need to learn more about Christianity and its hidden character, and for that you have to refer to my work Christianity in a different Light and subsequent works.
I have left to the last of the witness who might otherwise have been suspected – I mean the Hindus themselves. The whole of their literature from one end to the other is pervaded by expressions of love and reverence for truth [Max Muller, p 59]. I doubt whether in any other of the ancient literatures of the world you will find traces of that extreme sensitiveness of conscience which despairs of our ever speaking the truth, and which declares silence as gold, and speech silver, though in a much higher sense than our proverb. Max Muller, p 67
Max Muller wrote that the whole of Hindu literature from one end to the other is pervaded by expressions of love and reverence for truth. He expressed doubt whether in any other of the ancient literatures of the world you will find traces of that extreme sensitiveness of conscience which despairs of our ever speaking the truth.
Now, ask yourself a question. Here stood Hindu society which practiced truth and justice by thought, speech and action for thousands of years, and with consistency. Could there have existed, unnoticed by all concerned, the gross social injustice of such magnitude in form of the infamous Caste system? Was it the brainchild of those conspirators, who converted into reality of today, something that was nonexistent in the days of which they spoke of?
If you approach the Hindus with such feelings, you will teach them neither rectitude, nor science, nor literature. Nay, they might appeal to their own literature, even to their law-books, to teach us at least one lesson of truthfulness, truthfulness to ourselves, or, in other words, - humility. Max Muller, pp 67-68
Max Muller writes, "Hindus may teach us at least one lesson of truthfulness, that is, truthfulness to ourselves". What did Christian educators do? Instead of learning that truthfulness from Hindus, they destroyed the truthfulness of the Hindus. This is what you acquire from an Aasuric culture like Christianity. They have destroyed your sense of ethics, justice, truthfulness all that you ever valued. If it was all so good for 24 centuries continuously, as documented in the testimonies by non-Hindu visitors to this Hindu land, then what went wrong in less than two centuries? The answer is simple. Keeping all factors constant, the only variable on the scene is the presence of Aasuric influence of Christianity, which has eclipsed the Hindu society
It generally takes longer to build than dismantle! Not for centuries, but for millenniums, Braahmans played the exemplary role. They themselves lived as the poorest [*] of the lot but raised rich morals among the rest in the society. And, ample evidence of such rich morals, as documented by many-many foreign visitors to this Hindu land over more than two millenniums, you have already seen.
[*] Do you remember the legendry poor DronAachaarya who could not buy milk for his only child Ashwatthaama? Do you remember poor Sudaama who could only carry few grams when he went to meet his childhood friend Shri Krishn? Do you remember the stories that you read during your childhood? Whenever the central figure of the story would be a Braahman, did they all not start as "once upon a time there was a poor Braahman". Can you remember any story "Once upon a time there was a rich Braahman"? Well, I would not be surprised if you manage to find me one of them created during past fifty odd years by one of those MarxistCommunist intellectual professors of JNU who have mastered the technique of fabricating history in connivance with their bedfellow AMU professors. You will find enough evidence of such historical fabrications in Ayodhya Suffocated Voice of Truth.
However, this all gradually changed after introduction of ChristianEnglish Education System in 1835 which not only replaced but also systematically eliminated the ancient Hindu education system from this soil. [Details in my other works.] You must understand one basic thing that it is education that shapes our understanding of this world and the happenings here; it is the education that shapes our thoughts and attitudes; it is the education that forms our value system.
Braahmans were chosen by the ChristianBritish for their induction into Christianized Anglicized culture. As Braahmans were most literate and capable of adopting any new form of education with ease, they were made the first guinea pigs of new education system. The graduates were given plush jobs in ChristianBritish administration which dramatically raised their fortunes as these Braahmans used to be poorest of all 4 Varn(s). With this change in their life style and living comforts their whole attitude towards life and the society changed. With new Christianized education from childhood the newer generations of Braahman born were made to learn new philosophy and new attitudes towards life and its goal. Now they became no less expansive in their life style and attitudes and the inherent contracting tendencies were soon replaced by Christianized expansive tendencies, the ills of all that we see today.
How these Braahmans were manipulated and then gradually victimized is a tale of conspiracy against humanity that I have touched upon in varying degree in two of my earlier works ‘Do your history books tell you these facts’ and ‘Christianity in a different Light Volume II’. In this context, it must be understood that none of my works are stand alone and do not tell the whole story at one place. There is a continuity and connectivity among all
Macaulay: We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Bhaaratiya in blood and color, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and in intellect. [N S Rajaram, p 181]
These Braahmans and Kshatriyas having been groomed up under ChristianizedEnglish education they learned to admire their ChristianBritish masters and adopted all their ills fully. They saw their ChristianBritish master acting as the oppressors of worst kind and they too gradually became much like them. They saw their ChristianBritish masters treating the poor section of people as dirt not as human beings and they also adopted those evils from their masters whom they admired. Then having corrupted these two classes very substantially, those very ChristianBritish masters and their ChristianBritish missionary stooges turned the poorer class against the affluent class of Christianized Braahman and Kshatriya born
This is technique of creating division and putting one against the other, those ChristianBritish had learned from their messiah Jesus Christ very well whose statements you can find documented in any Christian Bible.
Oxford Dictionary p 1249, p 792, p 1143 New Testament is the second part of the Christian Bible; Gospel is the record of Christ’s life and teachings in the first four books of the New Testament; St Matthew was an Apostle, and the author of the first Gospel; p 1099 St Luke was an evangelist, and the author of the third Gospel; p 1928, p 77 St Thomas was an Apostle; Each of the twelve chief disciples of Jesus Christ is an Apostle
Christian Bible New Testament Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against the mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 10:36 And a man’s foe shall be they of his own household. 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me. 12: 30 He that is not with me is against me
Christian Bible New Testament Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: 12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. [Nay a negative answer Oxford Dictionary p 1237]
Gospel of Thomas 16 Jesus said: Perhaps men think that I came to cast peace on the world; and they do not know that I came to cast division upon earth, fire, sword, war. For five will be in a house; there will be three against two and two against three, the father against the son and the son against the father. And they will stand because they are single ones. 56 Jesus said: He who will not hate his father and his mother cannot be my disciple. And he who will not hate his brothers and sisters, and carry his cross as I have, will not become worthy of me. [Gospel of Thomas as quoted in The Myth of Saint Thomas and Mylapore Shiva Temple, p 76 n]
Though it may all sound quite far fetched a hypothesis without any base and any supporting evidence to you here but if the common sense prevails on you and so does the curiosity and desire to explore I would implore you to read my other works one by one and you will find all evidence there that you need. But do not expect everything jam packed in one little book of this kind.
Unless you are able to set aside your perceptions with regard to Caste system and VarnAashram Dharm, there is no point your proceeding with my work. If you intend to keep harping on what you have come to believe over the years then please do not proceed. You will simply be wasting your time. You will learn nothing.
Those face saving approaches by Christian educated Hindu apologists who try to explain away what they remotely understand
SÉÉiÉÖ´ÉÇhªÉÈ ¨ÉªÉÉ ºÉÞŸÆõ MÉÖhÉEò¨ÉÇÊ´É¦ÉÉMÉ¶É:*
According to the division of Gun (trait) and Karm (deed), "I have evolved" the system of 4-Varn. [Gun: ‘u’ is pronounced as in ‘Put’] BhagavadGita, Adhyaay 4 Shlok 13
It has become fashionable to explain that Bhagavaan Shri Krishn referred to traits and deeds of present birth, which would mean, expressed differently, occupation of the present birth. This explanation is inspired by two things. One: influence of Christian education which does not accept prior births. Two: vested interests of those who offer such explanation. As for the rest of the folks, they only copy what appeals to them.
When people find it inconvenient to question the statement of Bhagawaan Shri Krishn, they prefer to explain it away in a different manner. They present an explanation: He did not mean it by birth, but He meant it by occupation. Such explanation can be cited with an example:
Mahaatma Jyotirao Phule had correctly dismissed the birth-based caste system. He asked if a couple had three sons who became saadhu, leader and businessman then what will be their Jaati. They would be Braahman, Kshatriya and Vaishya according to their occupation irrespective of the Jaati of their birth.
This explanation has gained considerable ground over the period, and many keep parroting it, like it was done in the above case, in an article published on the editorial page of The Free Press Journal on 6 March 2004. This approach is hypocritical, because here you tend to explain it away in a more socially acceptable way, looking at the direction wind blows today. This is how you fool yourself and rest of the world.
Jyotirao Phule argued so because he had a vested interest. He himself was born a Shoodr. He needed to uplift his social status. He needed to uplift his own social status because ChristianBritish had destroyed the base structure of Hindu society and created extraordinary disparities. Those disparities were a reflection of the disparity the ChristianBritish themselves maintained between the whites and the browns ~ the Christians and the Heathen Hindus.
Child that arrives on earth
Bhagavaan Shri Krishn spoke of birth-based classification depending on division of Gun (traits) and Karm (deeds). I do not wish to explain away His statement. Instead, I wish to explain His statement.
The child that arrives on this earth cannot choose its mother and father. It cannot choose surroundings at the time of birth. It cannot choose environment that it would live-in during its early childhood. Depending on its ‘traits and deeds’ in its prior incarnations, it takes birth through Braahman parents or Kshatriya parents or Vaishya parents or Shoodr parents. This does not happen by accident or by coincidence, as the present day rationalists would want us to believe. There is a meticulous system in place that monitors the whole process.
Soul emerges from the Supreme Soul. At its origin, it has no character of its own. It descends on this earth encased in a body. Its ego gives it a distinct identity. Its thoughts and actions (deeds) are guided by this ego. It acquires various traits, in varying degree, in course of its long journey of numerous and successive births. It builds a reservoir of its Gun (traits) and Karm (deeds) through that process. Soul sheds its body at the time of departure from this earth. It does not take with it in physical form the traits it acquired and deeds it performed, during its stay on the earth. In its successive birth, it collects back those traits from the environment of this earth. During the process of birth and growing up, it regains those traits from its parents and environment. Some traits it acquires back during the process of its birth. That include the genes it acquires from its earthly parents. Other traits it acquires back in the process of its growing up. That include the environment it receives in form of friends, teachers, surroundings, and etc.
Each new birth gives the new born a place in the society. With that it gets a preset environment to grow up. This place and environment is the result of its deeds through prior incarnations. These are not by its choice. It cannot choose its parents. It cannot choose its time of birth. It cannot choose its surroundings at the time of birth. It cannot choose its environment during its early childhood. Process of birth itself takes care of positioning the soul in a certain situation (a) situation comprising of its genetic combination and childhood surroundings (b) situation depending on its acquired traits and accumulated deeds until its prior incarnation.
Purpose of Varn Vyavastha
Braahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shoodr are 4-Varn that Bhagawaan Shri Krishn spoke about. There was a definitive purpose behind 4-Varn System in Hindu society. Necessary occupational training would come from the family itself, and each ancient Hindu village would be self-dependant. There would be No need for migration, like today; self-sufficiency and self-dependence would be the motto of Hindu 4-Varn System.
Braahman parents would provide the child with an environment to grow up as teachers to the society. Kshatriya parents would provide the child with an environment to grow up as protectors of life and land of the society. Vaishya parents would provide the child with an environment to grow up as suppliers of necessities of life to the society. Shoodr parents would provide the child with an environment to grow up as provider of all services to the society.
The necessary training that each would receive would come from the family itself. For instance, son would learn necessary skills from his father. The system would operate in a cyclic pattern from one generation to other. The necessary training would be passed on from one generation to another, by father to the son, and thus ensure continuity of self-sufficiency and self-dependence of each village unit.
The Hindu society would live in small units called villages, and each village would be self-sufficient in respect of its needs with regard to its education, administration, supplies and services. Towns would be few, and the number of those living in towns would be minuscule in comparison to the whole nation.
To ensure that, each village administration would be self-sufficient and self-dependant. It would have Braahman priests and teachers, Kshatriya administrators and defenders, Vaishya producers and agriculturists, and Shoodr service providers with all types of artisans. Here is the documented evidence.
The village communities are composed of those who cultivate the land, the established village-servants, priest, blacksmith, carpenter, accountant, washer-man (whose wife is ex officio midwife of the little village community), potter, watchman, barber, shoemaker, etc. Max Muller, p 255 referring to old Hindu system
There would be no need for migration of people from one village to another, except by marriages. Thus, women would come from nearby villages, while sons would remain on the soil. For instance, in ancient Hindu society, a child of a barber would learn necessary skills from his father watching his father do the job when the child comes up a certain stage.
Compare this with American/European Christian societies
American/European Christian societies do not believe in this system. As a result, if you want to become a barber in Canada, you have to go to a school and pay fees (year 1996) CA$ 6,000 (Rs 1,80,000) to become a barber! Thus, Hair cutting schools would have made their share of money, and their business would flourish. Having paid such a hefty fees to qualify as a barber (you cannot become a barber otherwise), you will squeeze your customers accordingly, charge CA$ 10-15 (Rs 300-450) for a haircut. Thus, you make the living of the other person so very costly, and call it high standard of living!
In North America today, it is so very difficult to find Braahman equivalents (teachers) and Shoodr equivalents (other service providers) in sufficient numbers. So, they have to ask people from other countries to come in and do those jobs. The economies of these countries would flop without these immigrants. For instance, Canada’s Ontario province [state capital Toronto] had been in deep red for long. They came out of it only in year 2000 when they had first time a surplus budget after long. This has been possible only after massive induction of foreign migrants in human form and their lifesaving hard cash, which came with them while migrating.
Such is the dependence on others on account of a faulty social system of which they are quite proud. Besides, there is no true respect for teachers as compared to ancient Hindu Varn system, and that happens to be another aspect of this ill-conceived Christian social system, which makes teachers not worthy of that kind of respect.
Rigorous life cycle of a Braahman born
Braahman born would be required to undertake a disciplined life style. First 25 years of Braahman’s life would be spent in total celibacy (Brahm’Charya). He would be engaging himself, during this period of his life, in pursuit of knowledge. He would later be required to fulfill the role of the teacher and a guide to the society. Next 25 years of Braahman’s life would be spent in family life (Grihasth). His being in the family life would have a very definitive purpose in social context. He would be meeting his responsibility towards the society in giving it, its next generation. Children of next generation would be carrying on the tradition after he is gone. Following 25 years he would spend in the woods (Vaan’Prasth) living close to the Mother Nature. The solitude this would provide, would not allow him day-to-day contact with children and household affairs. During this period, he would be gradually learning to detach him self from worldly affairs. With that, he would also be getting a taste of the world away from this world. Remaining part of his life would be spent in total abandonment of worldly ties, Sannyaas. His sole occupation would be to focus his mind only on to the God. His preparation for the journey towards God would begin in full faith and consistency. This would allow a Braahman born to graduate towards the higher ends of earthly life through the course of numerous births, if he is able to maintain the sanctity of Braahman birth through his thoughts and actions.
If a Braahman born is not able to maintain the sanctity of Braahman birth through his thoughts and actions throughout his life time then he goes back the ladder as many steps as his thoughts and actions have earned him. This is where the concept of accumulated deeds comes into play. The deeds can take him back many steps even down to the Shoodr stage depending on the nature of his deeds.
The Varn of the Family of your subsequent births will depend on your acquired traits and accumulated deeds of earlier births. ChristianEnglish education system has taught we Hindus for past six generations that there is no rebirth. The man is born only once and after that he goes either to heaven or to Hell and lives there forever till eternity. He goes to heaven if was born a Christian or if he has adopted Christianity during his life time because Jesus is the Sole redeemer of the humanity. If the person was born not as a Christian and not adopted Christianity during his life time then he goes to Hell and lives there till eternity. Every Christian born or Christian convert is duty bound to convert all heathens into Christianity out of their sheer love for humanity as they cannot bear the thought of so many heathens burning in Hell Fire till eternity!
Heathens, according to dictionary definition, are those who are not Christian, Jew, or Muslim. They are follower of a polytheistic religion. For instance, the Hindus. They are the unenlightened people regarded as lacking culture or moral principles. This dictionary definition should tell you how you are placed in comparison to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. If you have any misgivings about your standing in their eyes, at least, do not keep fooling yourself that all are equal.
No such rigor for Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shoodr born
Those born in other three Varn(s) would not be required to undergo the rigors that were expected of the Braahman Varn. They could live their whole life within the social framework and continue to enjoy the family life until death, unless an individual decided otherwise for himself.
Kshatriya born would be required to undergo training of a warrior and would be expected to participate in protection of the nation, human lives and wealth, social justice and administration. Their natural inclination would be towards organizing, managing, maintaining, politics, and ruler-ship.
Vaishya born would be required to undergo training in agriculture, manufacture and trade. They would engage themselves in cultivation of agriculture and manufacture of other produces that would be necessary for sustaining life on the earth. They would have natural aptitude for trade and commerce.
Shoodr born would be required to undergo training in meeting all other needs for the society. They would naturally gravitate towards service and labor. They would provide other services needed by Braahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya Varn, as well as Shoodr Varn.
Shoodr and Untouchable were NOT same
Sanjay is one of the central figures in BhagavadGita. His name appears in BhagavadGita a number of times. He is the person who narrates to blind Dhrit’Raashtr as to what had been happening at KuruKshetr. By profession he was charioteer. He drove the chariot of Dhrit’Raashtr. He served Kshatriya Dhrit’Raashtr and was born in a Shoodr family. If he was untouchable how Dhrit’Raashtr allowed him to touch his chariot or sit next to him inside the palace when the war was in progress?
ChristianWorld loves to repeat again and again, over and again, the term Untouchable with reference to Hindu society. Three years ago I was shown a book that was taught in Italian schools. It was a thin book. It covered Hinduism on one page. The page was dominated by a picture and on the side there was some text in Italian language which I could not read. But the picture spoke volumes about Hinduism. Italian children from their childhood learned what Hinduism was all about from that page on Hinduism. Other pages were filled with such other primitive civilizations of the world. The picture comprised of two persons. One was frail bodied Gandhi in his few inches-wide wrapping around his waistline. The other was a man looking in his eighties. His body frail, starving, stomach almost touching the back, so thin was the body. This was the portrayal of an Untouchable. The message was complete. The picture showed the pathetic condition of an untouchable in Hinduism with their messiah Gandhi who represented BhaaratVarsh.
Why Dome would be untouchable?
Dome (‘o’ as in pope not as in done) is untouchable. He burned dead bodies. He lived in Shmashaan (crematorium) that are not like Westernized electric crematoriums with nice building and neat environment. The place would be such where there would be skulls around in open, bones, jackals and all such things. Place would not be used for human habitation.
What would be his living habits?
Dome would spend most of his time there. As a result his living habits would be quite unhygienic. His family would not be living far because a Dome may be needed any time, day or night; to burn dead bodies for people do not plan their death during working hours of Monday to Friday.
What would be the living habits of his family members?
His family lived with him and their living habits would not be any different from the dome who would be the head of the family. So the entire family would have similar unhygienic living conditions by normal standards. Children of the family would live in the same environment; grow up playing in the crematorium environment, as their father would keep himself available to receive dead bodies any time during the day and night, weekday or weekend. His and families living depended on dead people as that was his profession.
Why children would acquire father’s occupation?
People die in villages too for they cannot plan their death by going to cities. Therefore, Dome family would live in a village; children would grow up in village crematorium environment, which would be an open space; they would die in the same place. Their lives would revolve around that place. Thus, generation after generation they would be living at the same place. Children would acquire father’s occupation and the life would go on.
Why they would not feel anything wrong with their living habits?
From their birth till death they would live in the same environment and they would feel quite at home about it. They would not see anything wrong with their living habits because it would feel natural to them.
But other people, who would have different occupation, would not feel at home about their way of living. It would not be natural to them because they would be raised in different environment primarily governed by each family’s own occupation. Why other people would not be comfortable in associating with them? If not for anything else, purely for hygienic reasons other people would not be comfortable associating with dome families. Touching is the first point of contact in any lesson of hygiene.
Let us also test the European magnanimity
When I was in Europe and we went to a departmental store, before picking up fruits and vegetables my host put on thin plastic hand gloves and requested me to do so. The explanation was that we could contaminate the uncut fruits and uncut raw vegetables with the germs that we carried on our hands from outside. Well, our hands are generally clean, there is no dirt or dust or any such thing. We do not even burn dead bodies. Even with that kind of life style we could have passed on germs from our hands to raw vegetables and fruits by contact of touch! The same European host felt so very appalled by the very thought of human untouchability. I wished my host was called upon to embrace a dome in his living quarters with his original living habits and then I would have wanted to see the European magnanimity of thought and action.
People who clean open drainage systems in cities
There are people who clean the drainage system. These are open drains with human and animal filth and excrements and all other kind of dirty things in it. These are not the drainage systems of Western countries. People who do the job have to go inside the drain also, at times, when needed. Otherwise also they would use their scanty tools to clean those drainage systems. If it is their occupation day in day out then they could not feel dirty about the drains. It is part of their daily lives.
Wife and children also work with those drains
Generally husband and wife both would be working at it. Grown up children too would join them. It runs in the family for this is their livelihood and no one looks at their bread with dirty looks. When we talk of dignity of labor we seem to ignore that these people who do their jobs on drainages do not think otherwise. They may not talk these high-funda words for impressing others and impressing themselves but they understand and practice in their own life the dictum of dignity of labor. They do not feel
1 post • Page 1 of 1
Caste System is the Backbone of Hindu Dharma