Najasat and Shiaism

[happy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najasat

please have a look at this..i am surprised to read what i have read in this after what javanmard put up on this forum regarding this topic. this document totally contardicts and is the opposite of what javamard has been saying this term is in fact applied to 'non muslims' such as the sikhs

its all well trying to build peace and a nice picture but post the whole picture not just a bit of it javanmard....thanks

peace out

:D :D

[Guest Javanmard]

Had you read my other post you'd know that:

1. it's a notion that has no real foundation in Shi'ism

2. that it has been challenged as being non-authentic by 19th centiry Shi'a scholars

3. And that most Shi'as todays have given it up.

4. I have studied this notion with a Si'a expert of Islamic law: the word najis is not used in the Qur'an or Sunnah. He himself confirmed to me that it was actually an Iranian racist trend which had nothing to do with Islam.

5. Had this been the case with all Iranian Shi'as how do you explain that the Sikhs of the Iranian city of Zahedan got married to Iranian Shi'a women?

Happy, before accusing others of being double faced, check your facts and learn Arabic and Persian and try interacting with proper Islamic scholars before you post stuff like that.

btw. isn't it a bit contradictory to talk about the notion of najasat when in our community the majority would refuse to have their daughter married to another caste or even nationality because they are less "pure". This is NOT a minority behaviour I am afraid...

[Niranjana]

Javanmard, on your final point, I understand the context in which you are making mention of this to Happy, however I would also like to point out the following.

Punjabi Sikhs or those of Indian descent may well continue to marry within biradhari, however their reluctance to marry outside of their clans is nothing to do with 'pollution'.

This is a clear reason why Jatts, Alhuwalias, Ravidasias, Ramgarhias, Khatris etc within Sikhs are not castes in the same way that that they are amongst the traditional 'Hindu' custom - we do not have an issue with pollution, if there was then one wouldn't see non-Ramgarhias/Ravidasias/Jatts happily dining at Ramgarhia/Ravidasia/Singh Sabha Gurdwaras which can be observed the world over.

Similarly there isn't anyone caste amongst the Sikhs that has any 'religious' grounds to exclusivity or rights over another, which further differentiates it from the tradition caste system as espoused by the law of Manu.

There is plenty of research on the net exploring this issue of caste amongst Sikhs and the misconception that it is the same as the caste system amongst Hindus, which does include the belief of pollution.

[Guest Javanmard]

Well as much as I would love to believe you Niranjana the very fact that some Sikh castes are considered high or low implies a caste hierarchy based on the notion of purity in terms of occupation. Panjabis SIkhs may be more relaxed in terms of commensality (eating together) but when it comes down to marriage the issue remains the same and when a father says:"I am not marrying my daughter to nivi jaat", well I am afraid it implies a hierarchy based on purity of occupation. example: a chamar is considered low caste because his traditional occupation is dealing with leather i.e. skins of dead animals which is considered an impure occupation. Same thing for a Mirasi. Jatts and Tarkhans though originally Indo-Scythian warrior nomades are considered low caste vis a vis Khatris because of their non-Indian origin. As much you try to rationalise it Niranjana, and I am sure you do it with the best intentions, the fact remains that though more relaxed on certain caste issue, most Panjabi Sikhs have retained the Brahmanical model of purity of occupation and its hierarchy and trying to deny that is just plain revisionism. When you mention that such exclusivism is not based on religious grounds I do not agree because you reduce religious behaviour of Panjabi Sikhs to Sikhism alone when in fact when it comes down to horizontal religiosity (dealing with marriage) the sad thing is that they have retained Brahmanical notions reinforced by the 19th century emergence of sanskritised middle classes (vegetarianism as a sign of social status).

[drawrof]

I believe in da panth, and I give bigups to all, dat don't look at da jaat, insted, look at da jatha you part of....becuz cultre dont mean ish, but da amrit you get is wat iz all about, no' wut I mean?...like guru cares

'bout rehit...nun of dis caste ish'

[happy]

so javanmard why dont you enlighten us by providing answers to my other topics

http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...&highlight=

[Guest]

I believe in da panth, and I give bigups to all, dat don't look at da jaat, insted, look at da jatha you part of....becuz cultre dont mean ish, but da amrit you get is wat iz all about, no' wut I mean?...like guru cares

'bout rehit...nun of dis caste ish'

mega lol ,

thanks to drawrof to put funny comments with point behind them once an while in discussions and making them alive

[happy]

discuss seriuosly not in a joking manner guys come on get youre fingers out

peace out

:D :D

[Niranjana]

Javanmard – whilst I am not going to suggest that we gloss over the subject, I will argue that the manner in which caste factors amongst Sikhs has been misrepresented does not make this a black and white discussion, or to use the scholarly word of choice: it is simply “reductionist†to suggest that caste amongst Sikhs is the same as that stipulated under the Manu laws.

I am not suggesting that some people choose to use caste as a means to impose their perceived superiority over others, in the same way others use race and class – however just as the acceptance of there being different racial groups, class groups doesn’t make one a racist (otherwise, I presume I am one simply because I identify you as white?) the same way acknowledgement of caste tribes in itself is hardly wrong.

So I will agree that it is absurd to argue that one should refuse entirely to have their daughter marry someone simply on the basis that the prospective groom is of another caste, however should an individual express the desire to marry within their own community then that is perfectly fine and not something necessarily to be frowned upon – after all, the majority of social interactions occur on grounds of similarities and very often factors such as education, social groups, interests, and so on are linked to broader class groups, communities and castes – of course there are exceptions to this as with anything.

My point is simply that the topic of caste is not as black and white – and I an not saying you are purporting the following – however many modern day enthusiasts influenced by what you term “19th century emergence of sanskritised middle classes (vegetarianism as a sign of social status)†like to argue that caste ‘doesn’t exist’ through to “we should all make concerted efforts to marry out of caste†– these are plainly absurd notions and the real issues are clouded.

I, as someone who married out of caste and of my own choice, am more than happy for others to do the same – I had no problems from my parents nor my in laws and both families are Keshadharis and ‘traditional’. That said, the notion of caste not existing is a nonsense, it exists as much as class, race and other social factors – unfair discrimination on the basis of caste, class, race is the issue, not these groups themselves. I fully accept my caste background as having some defining attributes in me as an individual and likewise that of my partner and their background, however I don’t believe that in doing so I am somehow enforcing any manu law nor am I in recommending for other members of my family, partners of the same caste group.

Likewise to suggest that everyone make a concerted effort to marry out of caste is rather like a suggestion I read in a paper comment some years ago by some ill-informed ‘do gooders’ that all should look to have ‘interracial marriages’ to eliminate racism – the problem I have with this is that it’ll only give rise to the next set of racist type behaviour – i.e. against those who haven’t married out of race, class, caste, religion etc.

Anyhow, this is an endless debate, for the most part we can agree that Gurbani clearly forewarns us against the use of false pride in one’s caste and with this I feel we should move on ahead.

Good to have had this discussion with you.

Niranjana.