Jump to content

Caste Hierarchy Explained


Recommended Posts

Disclaimer: The Caste Hierarchy cannot actually be explained away since its very complex. However I will attempt it anyway. :D Hopefully this sheds some light on the what's going on with the caste system.

Yea true, i didnt mean so . The thing we have to make efforts to have caste heirarchy erased. Just as you see during the times of the Gurus , the last names remained and at times even ethnic identities but never was it considered a issue . There is a sakhi of Guru Gobindsingh ji which shows that steel should always be respected . Guruji addresses the Sikligar sikh as 'Marwari Sikh' . So nothing high and low has any place .

Jaikaara

You can not erase the caste hierarchy. It is here to stay. Is a guru at the same level as his sikh? I don't think so. People are different, have different capabilities, interests, etc. Some fortunate others not so much, different environments. The list goes on, what it leads to are hierarchies. Some will acquire more or less knowledge, wealth, skills, strenght, agility, spiritual power, etc. So the system is inherently unequal. This is what the ancient sages were dealing with.

You can not ignore caste hierarchies either because the experience of those on different levels are different. E.g if you are guru you will give one teaching to one level and another teaching to the second level. it's because their needs and capabilities are different. You'll see this Guru Granth Sahib. Granted there is an underlying theme e.g. "be detached from maya, meditate on Ram naam" that is for all castes, you are not going to tell a homeless, that your wealth will not go with you on death lol. That message is for the rich and wealthy. You are not going to tell a sudra to stop arguing about various philosophies and scriptures, that message is for the brahmin.

Keep in mind:

You are not a doctor if you were born to parents with doctorates. You are a doctor if you behave like one. Similarly you are not a brahmin if you were born to a brahmin mother, you are a brahmin only if you act like one, only if you contemplate Brahm.

How do you manage a system that is inherently unequal? Well you can not simply shrug off the responsibility by saying everyone is equal. That doesn't work out since the differences and the problems that arise with those differences are very apparent. You need to tackle it keeping in mind the inequality in the system. So how to tackle it? well the ancient sages noticed there are essentially 4 kinds of people.

1. There are the knowledgeable and wise, who are focused on reading, memorizing, calculating, learning and/or contemplating. They are good at sharing, they live in full abundance.

2. There are brave and passionate, who are focused on tackling, going against an opposing force and/or training, They are physical and/or aggressive. They are also good at sharing, they live in partial abundance.

3.There are those who do not fit within the previous two categories because they are not as good at doing those things. They don't share, they live in little abundance. If not, this category also includes those who for some reason or another cannot fulfill the roles of the 1 and 2 categories even though they possess the right qualities.

4. There are those who do not possess the capabilities of the previous categories. If they do its hardly noticeable. They cannot give, are living in complete scarcity and so are constantly trying trying to acquire rather than to share. This category also includes those who for some reason or another cannot fulfill the roles of the 1 and 2 categories, even though they possess the right qualities.

There is a hidden Nth category. The Enlightened, the one who as achieved Mukti, the Sadhu, Sant, Guru, Rishi, etc. Which is higher than the 1-4, no matter which category he came from.

You can see the kinds of jobs 1-4 would be good at.

1. Philosophers, doctors, mathematicians, priests, scientists, economists, theologians...

2. Politcal leaders, athletes, soldiers, managers...

3. Businessmen and other related professions...

4. Labour jobs: artisans, carpenters, farmers...

The specialties required for 1 and 2 are not required by 3 and 4. So people who do not possess the qualities of 1 and 2 end up in jobs 3 and 4.

Now with people from 2 in positions of power. You want that power guided by the force of knowledge and wisdom, by people from 1.

The people in 1 will be corrupted by positions of power in 2, and will be corrupted by the seeking of wealth in 3. So you want them living a simple life and outside the realm of power. But you still want them to guide people in 2, 3, 4 from the life of simplicity.

The control is thus granted to 2. Where 2 takes guidance from 1. The king (kshatriya) takes guidance from the minister (brahmin). He maintains company with a learned one so that he can rule properly.

It must be stressed that not all people in 2 (or 1) are in positions of power, in fact most are powerless.

People in 3 should not be associated with the jobs in 1 and 2. Businessmen corrupt governments and research. When you turn ruling and learning into business you corrupt ruling and learning.

Sometimes those in 1 and 2, especially 2, the kshatriya, the soldiers and bodyguards, who are jobless when there is no war. Large numbers of these kshatriyas then looked to other professions. Many became businessmen, many took on other jobs. The Gurus' ancestors were in this category. They had become traders though originally they were warriors from the ruling class. (There was a zeal in the 6th Guru and his grandson, the 10th Guru to return to being warriors and rulers.) The Gurus are also from the Nth class, thus being Kshatriyas are considered higher than brahmins.

The Panj Pyarey were all Kshatriya. Their ancestors had adopted other professions during times of peace.

Dharam Das' ancestors turned to farming.

Himmat Chand Kahar's ancestors turned to trading.

Mohkam Chand's ancestors turned to cloth printing.

Daya Ram's ancestors also turned to trade.

Sahib Chand's ancestors became barbers.

Das, Chand, Ram are all Kshatriya clans. At some point in time they were warriors. When describing the state of affairs during his time Guru Sahib says.

ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
दोहरा ॥
DOHRA

ਬਿਪ੍ਰ ਕਰਤ ਭਏ ਸੂਦ੍ਰ ਬ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਛਤ੍ਰੀ ਬੈਸਨ ਕਰਮ ॥
बिप्र करत भए सूद्र ब्रिति छत्री बैसन करम ॥
The Brahmins acted like Shudras and Kshatriyas like Vaishyas.

ਬੈਸ ਕਰਤ ਭਏ ਛਤ੍ਰਿ ਬ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸੂਦ੍ਰ ਸੁ ਦਿਜ ਕੋ ਧਰਮ ॥੨॥
बैस करत भए छत्रि ब्रिति सूद्र सु दिज को धरम ॥२॥
The Vaishyas started ruling like Kshatriyas and Shudras performed the priestly duties of Brahmins.2.

During peacetime they turned to other trades however when the time came to fight teh Mughals, none of these kshatriya-turned-vaishya would step forth.

This is why Guru Gobind Singh ji held the event at Anandpur where he ordered them to take up arms. He emphasized his own warrior ancestory, and wanted to see other kshatriya return to their roles and take up arms. And because he wanted to unite them, he gave them a new identity as kshatriya, ie one with long hair and beard, and the name Singh. Thus with Guru Sahib's policy you no longer belong to the Das, Ram or Chand clan, you now belong to the united Singh clan.

So there was never an attempt to erase the hierarchy either. There were attempts to correct it. So those who were of a true Kshatriya nature would naturally step forth when asked for their life! (genius) And these 5 fearless would naturally make good leaders for the rest of the kshatriya hence Guru Sahib gave them leadership.

That's it for now. I'll share more later.

Bhulan chukan maaf karna

Edited by BhagatSingh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bhagat ji.

I seriously contest your assertions about caste and will respond in good time as I am monumentally busy right now. Just so you know. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dally ji

I know lol.

-- -------------------------------

Let me clarify this:

well the ancient sages noticed there are essentially 4 kinds of people.

1...

2...

3...

4...

This is incorrect. What they noticed was that there were two roles that required a strict code of conduct and specialization: Brahmin and Kshatriya. 3 and 4 included people who for one reason or another did not fit into 1 and 2.

The Brahmin and the Kshatriya, and the many jobs that come under these categories require the individual do maintain a certain character and to possess certain skills and talents, to various degrees. So these became the top two tiers. The bottom two tiers were people who were not as talented, skilled, did not have the right character either or simply didn't want to be in the top tier. Thus they were not held up to the same standards as the top two tiers.

The brahmin represents the qualities of the Sato gun. The kshatriya represents the qualities of Rajo gun. The gun they are associate with is related to their job duties.

They also have the most amount of obligations in society. The weight of the whole society, their well-being rests on the Brahmin and Kshatriya. the Brahmins represent the intellectual progress of society. For example, India was leading the other countries in terms of knowledge and research, quite advanced in maths, astronomy, science, medicine and yoga. They were doing quite well in all areas and these ideas were being shared to other nations via trade routes, back and forth. All credit goes to the Brahmins.

Btw when British invaded India they also attacked Brahmins in the intellectual arena. The product of that was Singh Sabha ideology.

Now this was the ideal, of course, in the real world its quite messed up as Guru Sahib points out. Some people who should be Brahmins and kshatriya often get stuck in the bottom tier jobs. And some people who should not be taking those important roles end up in top tiers. He also realized that this cannot be fixed, and is quite natural for a system to have lots of diversity. But he did realize that he could obtain the most fearless kshatriya for his purpose if he could frame things in certain ways. He literally says, "I want to kill someone! Who is ready for it?" The madness alarmed everyone but it worked. Only the Kshatriya with the true spirit rose up.

That's it for now. More on this later when it comes.

Edited by BhagatSingh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

How do you explain massagetae which sounds a lot like massa jatt. Jatt, tarkhan, gujjar, rajput same patrilineal ancestry. Bruv, there's no caste hierarchy chamars bathing in ch#t should be banned from gurudawaras as they always been. If you someone calling someone a bhappa slap them and caste is done. I don't think people realize the rituals that make up Hindu life and how they aren't followed by 'sikhs'. Rakhri supposed to have pooja thali, sister making food, etc. Most any rhetoric that attempts to explain a social ill, instead of combat it ends up being solace to those who have deemed themselves victims. Poor solace, since it protects you from words and not bullets. Shastaar k adheen hai raaj|| Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Vaheguru Ji Ki Fateh||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you explain massagetae which sounds a lot like massa jatt.

I explain it as the most tenuous of links that some gora phudhu imagined, which hordes of dimwitted, defeated, pendu Panjabi peasant phudus later jumped on - to make them feel better about being defeated and have some sort of imagined connection to their new masters.

How do you explain it?

Edited by dalsingh101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking about any an invasion btw. They had aryavarta which stretched down to deccan and past that you don't find so called scythic tribes mostly. You had hastinapur civilization and bhils for example which is similar to Bantu and pygmy. I haven't studied it deeply as I only looked to see how long ago my clan became Sikh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can tell when someone Jatt though

Yeah, they are usually alcoholic, ignorant phudhus who curiously exhibit superiority complexes and inferiority complexes at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

Look at this dick, dragging us into the same old, tired peasant 'ethnography' bullshit arguments.

Eff off to Jattworld .com with that shit please.

0999d489-98e2-4b8e-815d-f86696d7adbaHiRe

Have a look at this beautiful specimen of a Jatt superman.

Edited by dalsingh101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bhagat Singh, your bs is getting dealt with next, when I get a minute. lol

The rest of you peasant hogis should exorcise any white man bullshit about Scythian, Aryan, Ukrainian gibberish out of your head. You're Panjabi, end of.

Dumb mfs.....

Carry on with this you'll be probably end up proudly fighting whiteys battles tomorrow like a prized slave....or your pendu grandpas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Bro what clan do you belong to ? maybe i could try to help you there

Sangha.

you now belong to the united Singh clan. - Exactly.

"So there was never an attempt to erase the hierarchy either. There were attempts to correct it"

What you describe is varna, the difference being that caste made it so that the son of a bramin HAD to be a bramin and nothing else.

If you let people strive for what they naturally excel it, while maintained a system to let that happen such as varna, you get the most powerful quom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you let people strive for what they naturally excel it, while maintained a system to let that happen such as varna, you get the most powerful quom.

Why are you so keen to preserve the varna system? Explain please?

Why do you think it will help in creating the most 'powerful quom' (your own words).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you so keen to preserve the varna system? Explain please?

Why do you think it will help in creating the most 'powerful quom' (your own words).

Because for the foreseeable future average person will be a retard. Give them a way to know 7 foot hot head should be in army, and tiny smart guy a ceo. Other wise you get confusion Like Western society or stagnation like east asian. If the system out lives its function get rid of it. Or people will be ready in a generation offer two, das estimates regardless of the political situation. Edited by GtLoc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so you're suggesting a rigid society where people get put into roles based on certain assumptions.

Reminds me of a famous book by Aldous Huxley - Brave New World I think it was called. He too based the society of his book on the Indian varna system.

I don't agree with you by the way. I know plenty of 6 foot plus gentle giants who shit themselves at the first sign of violence. I've seen smaller guys decimate bigger groups. Smart guys can also be seriously devious and selfish and derail a wider society for their own personal satisfaction - ambitions.

Then you'll also get that stupid desire by the elites to preserve power and leadership amongst their own clan or family like hogis do today (i.e. Badal and co. in Panjab) or the Bush family in America, or Gandhis in India etc. etc.

If you reflect the quality of thinking towards a solution of our societies problems - then we really truly are screwed.

More than anything else we need a proper grass roots level thing that has us perceiving and acting like we aren't each others enemy. We need to stop petty competing amongst ourselves and start competing with outside communities in a deeper way than just whose kids are the most educated, whose has the biggest house/car/turban etc. etc.

We don't need a static organisation of our society, we have that already, we need a more dynamic, adaptive one where talent is picked up and developed from a young age. One where capability, progression and vision are rewarded and encouraged. We need a whole cultural mindset change away from the petty rural bullshit or all the attempts to self-aggrandise based on caste, tribe backgrounds and glory days of the past. We need to stop using our ancestors as a ego prop and focus on the future - in a clear, realistic selfless way.

Otherwise we are just constantly going to have one over us by more astute, united communities.

Edited by dalsingh101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so you're suggesting a rigid society where people get put into roles based on certain assumptions.

Reminds me of a famous book by Aldous Huxley - Brave New World I think it was called. He too based the society of his book on the Indian varna system.

I don't agree with you by the way. I know plenty of 6 foot plus gentle giants who shit themselves at the first sign of violence. I've seen smaller guys decimate bigger groups. Smart guys can also be seriously devious and selfish and derail a wider society for their own personal satisfaction - ambitions.

Then you'll also get that stupid desire by the elites to preserve power and leadership amongst their own clan or family like hogis do today (i.e. Badal and co. in Panjab) or the Bush family in America, or Gandhis in India etc. etc.

If you reflect the quality of thinking towards a solution of our societies problems - then we really truly are screwed.

More than anything else we need a proper grass roots level thing that has us perceiving and acting like we aren't each others enemy. We need to stop petty competing amongst ourselves and start competing with outside communities in a deeper way than just whose kids are the most educated, whose has the biggest house/car/turban etc. etc.

We don't need a static organisation of our society, we have that already, we need a more dynamic, adaptive one where talent is picked up and developed from a young age. One where capability, progression and vision are rewarded and encouraged. We need a whole cultural mindset change away from the petty rural bullshit or all the attempts to self-aggrandise based on caste, tribe backgrounds and glory days of the past. We need to stop using our ancestors as a ego prop and focus on the future - in a clear, realistic selfless way.

Otherwise we are just constantly going to have one over us by more astute, united communities.

I agree, I didn't mean rigid I just mean anything but this western we are all the same and equal bs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, I didn't mean rigid I just mean anything but this western we are all the same and equal bs.

Sadly, I'd say we have flopped so badly as a society that even the flawed western system is better than what we currently have. We all know that despite its claims, western society is still very heavily (though subtly) hinged on white advantage/privilege but despite this, it still offers a modicum of protection to minorities and vulnerable groups enshrined in law.

Sikhs have cocked up so much that despite having a clear head-start on many of the grand, good reformative ideas of society that makes the western model attractive, they are still wallowing in savage pre-modern thinking!

Been reading about Charles Dickens life and times and how talented people of his time relentlessly pursued a reformation campaign against cruel aspects of Victorian society giving us what we see today. So he attacked workhouses, cruel treatment of prisoners, class snobbery, child labour, illiteracy. Our lot haven't even reached this point.

Edited by dalsingh101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Under the caste system is it wrong to be attracted to women of other castes?

Isn't there some kinda rule where by a superior caste can take a lower castes woman if he desires. But the children are almost like his slaves and won't retain the fathers caste directly?

Edited by JatherdarSahib
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the caste system is it wrong to be attracted to women of other castes?

Whether you are attracted or not doesn't mean anything. On the other hand, whether you are marrying them does. Marriage is very important because you will be living with this person, having kids with them and growing old together. You will have to work with their family and they will have to work with yours. Marriage is not only two people though, it's a coming together of families as well. Have you seen Indian marriages where the bhra/pita/chachay/tai/dada/nana from both sides come out in a ceremony and meet and greet each other and hug, and give presents. Marrying someone from the same background is usually the best because you are dealing with large families.

Isn't there some kinda rule where by a superior caste can take a lower castes woman if he desires. But the children are almost like his slaves and won't retain the fathers caste directly?

No, not that I've heard of.

Edited by BhagatSingh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you are attracted or not doesn't mean anything. On the other hand, whether you are marrying them does. Marriage is very important because you will be living with this person, having kids with them and growing old together. You will have to work with their family and they will have to work with yours. Marriage is not only two people though, it's a coming together of families as well. Have you seen Indian marriages where the bhra/pita/chachay/tai/dada/nana from both sides come out in a ceremony and meet and greet each other and hug, and give presents. Marrying someone from the same background is usually the best because you are dealing with large families.

Well, how does that fit into modern times when different people do the same job; totally unrelated to their hereditary castes?

Your position is so backwards and out of date in the diaspora - it is comical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Common sense would dictate that you read the original post before replying to it so you don't come across sounding like an idiot in your replies.

Keep in mind:

You are not a doctor if you were born to parents with doctorates. You are a doctor if you behave like one. Similarly you are not a brahmin if you were born to a brahmin mother, you are a brahmin only if you act like one, only if you contemplate Brahm.

Edited by BhagatSingh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^

Thanks; you've just confirmed the irrelevance and stupidity of the system. 'You are one if you act like it, you aren't if you don't', so all those cuddly lil Khatris who are actually shopkeepers and not remotely 'warriors' aren't Khatris really; like the hordes of people from traditionally peasant or carpenter backgrounds who do jobs like IT technical support in the west. Very few Churah or Chamars are refuse collectors or cobblers out here, so forth...

Plus your point is moot. How many people from the latter castes I mentioned above complain about resentful behavior when they move upwards in society huh? So a Chamar may not be doing his traditional role, but he still gets insulted. He still gets considered a xxxxxx. A Brahmin may be a lowly receptionist (I know one), and still feel like he is something special even if a Jat or Lohar totally outdoes him when they are doing degrees together. The legacy of caste lives on in the imagination of people.

Any differences between jaats (which are over exaggerated by casteists anyhow), will very quickly decrease as their children will be exposed to more or less similar influences in the diaspora. In the west, caste system will very quickly (within most of our own lifespans) become less and less important as mixed caste and mixed race marriages become more common. Given freedoms, women aren't going to conform to limiting the gene pool of men they can get with; and if the gender birthrate discrepancy of Sikhs is a fact, then that too will force people to seek partners outside of the traditional pool. I see freshiy pendu Jats marrying, dating Eastern European girls everywhere here in London. Put simply, the racial mix of Sikhs is going through changes that will have a significant impact on our society. What the long term implications of this is, I don't know, but that it is happening is irrefutable.

In sum, Indic caste is just some legacy of people trying to socially engineer society in a primitive time, that has long outlived its purpose/usefulness (if it ever had one). It has no sanction or place amongst Sikhs and was clearly designed to keep privileges amongst an elite whilst disabling any upward social mobility for those at the bottom. Those in the higher echelons may have compromised this rigidity occasionally in dire straits, when the situation compelled them too but that was driven more of desperation than any notion or act of egalitarianism. Sikhi represents a new dispensation outside of the traditional Indic varna system. This accounts for one of the most significant features which distinguishes it from other Indic systems. Put simply Sikhi has no fixed, hierarchical system of social organisation (like the varna system) and unequivocally condemns oppression whilst encouraging equality and humanity - we can see this in bani, in langar, in Amrit and a plethora of examples in our Gurus' behavior as passed down in sakhis.

This is not sugar-coating or wishful thinking; it's just the simple truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- The Sat Guru Ji's aim was to bring a Human Being into harmony with his creator.

- To achieve this end it does not matter what caste you belong or your social status.

- The negation of caste is not social engineering. Revolution of society is not the primary aim of Sikhi; it may, or may not come about as a side effect.

- Any society, even ours under a different name, from the foundation of civilization in Babylon, had a caste system or a system of social stratification, where some people were higher and had authority over others.

- This system has always been abused due to the egotistic nature of human beings.

"Sikhi has no fixed, hierarchical system of social organisation (like the varna system)"

- This is only true for Seekers of Truth who wish to walk on the path to become a Gurmukh.

- The Bhagats and The Guru Ji's accepted their roles in the caste system and society.

- Dalsingh you are mixing up categories and imposing categories of thought that are metaphysical onto mundane affairs.

- The Holy Guru Ji's stated that to worship Brahm the All, you should not be restricted by caste or gender.

- Sikhi was originally a mystical fraternity, not an attempt to create beneficial social conditions for Humankind. Satguru Sri Baba Nanak Ji actually cursed a village of good people and destroyed their society in order for them to spread around the land and spread their goodness.

- The main aim of the Guru ji's was not social betterment it was something else. Therefore casteism is a non-issue, it will always be, learn to live with it.

Sikhi represents a new dispensation outside of the traditional Indic varna system

- I believe this to be incorrect.

- Historically the Guru Ji's created communities of Seekers of Truth united by an aim to reach the font of creation.

- Each Sikh was instructed to live a healthy social life: Family, Work etc.

- Please tell me Dalsingh where was this social life to occur?

- Obviously it must occur within the 'caste' system prevalent at the time.

- During worship or Langer this caste system would be annulled and a common unity and aim would bring different castes together.

- Therefore Sikhi cannot represent a new dispensation of societal structure. Sikhi will always be embedded in the society it is part of. It does not form the rules of everyday life. Nor does it overtly and forcibly seek to change them. It may change them through subtler means, which the Holy Guru Ji's foresaw, i.e. effects caused by worship in a Sangat may cause certain changes in the atmosphere and may cause societal changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...