Menoculayshunal; Being We

Picking up from the thread of who we are and why we are, it is now time to look at the dimension which has become so skewed within its own culture that it is almost a swear word - indeed, as acted out in current form, is a blasphemy.

Caste. On reading that word, you certainly have your own 'take' on what it entails. And based on the goings-on in India, you are likely to be close to the mark. Before chucking stones, however, tell me where there is any society where such social inequalities do not exist. Everywhere there are the academics (Brahmin), the gentry (Kshatriya), the facilitators (Vaishya) and the working class (Shudra), and each will be inclined to 'stick to their own,' birds of a feather and all that.

The word is not appropriate, however. It arose from the early Portuguese traders to India, who perceived the social stratification as being along the lines of racial difference. The Portuguese word for race is casta. The Sanskrit word is varna and actually translates as colour. It does not relate to skin colour but personality - the inherent tendencies that drive our interests and activities.

The ancient and unauthored text called the Purusha Sukta describes creation as the waking and sleeping state of the universe's life force. Purusha is the Universal Man. When awake, everything in the universe bubbles and thrives. When He sleeps, everything sinks back into the primordial. This is a description of the expansion and implosion of the cosmos. 

Then come verses describing the creation of what we know on this earth. You see the key verse in this image. What is to be taken from this is that within any one person are all qualities. We can all be academics, aristocratic or military, businessmen or women or, serve society in those roles that so many consider 'lesser,' yet are so important for the structure of society. 

Things went awry when the Manusmriti came along. It is the text of the Brahmins, to put it bluntly. It is not without merit as a handbook of conduct, but it sets up the premise for elitism. Shloka 1.92 clearly states the purity of he who arose from the mouth of Purusha. The remainder of the text is about the conduct of those born thus. As stated, the conduct indicated is actually of strong spiritual and even chivalrous nature. For example, women of the household are to be respected and honoured else the home become godless and also...

Yet, throughout the text, there is a clear injunction against mixing with those of lesser birth. This single document, dating from about 2000 years ago, can be held responsible for the rise of the social classifications that have trapped people by birth rather than their talent. Completely opposing the description of the Vedic hymn which preceded it. Indeed, throughout the Vedas, the Purusha Sukta is the only place where there is any reference of this kind. What is more, even in Manusmriti, there is no talk of all the various sub-categories that have arisen as each within any given varna has sought to improve their stance and only the society itself came up with the concept of untouchable. Trust the human critter to take something noble and screw it up. The Bhagavad Gita (and other texts) attempt to correct this, but those in power do not give it up easily.

Anyway, that's rant enough. Back on track, and this is where we hark back to last week's post on karma. Following the Vedic depiction of us all having the abilities within us, exactly which becomes dominant depends on the karma we have to serve out. We may be born high according to our tendencies but may not live to the fullest spiritual potential in this birth due to the jiva's lessons yet to be learned.

Why tell all this concerning my time at Sandeepany? It had to be faced. Advaita Vedanta as a philosophy rises above such things and is truly inclusive and universal. However, I was in India, amongst Indians, and the majority of them had been exposed only to what might be termed the negative side of Hinduism. A fair few of the young men received reprimands at different times for conduct not conducive to their Advaitic intentions. No fault of their own but arising from upbringing being hard to deny. Also, (and here I tread a little carefully), our upacharya of Sanskrit and pujas was definitely old-school. His big heart of Love had difficulty letting me touch his feet because all his upbringing and experience was that I fit into the Dalit (untouchable) category; I was an unmarried female, unclassified despite having been accepted for attending Sandeepany and white. 

There was some mischief that took place indirectly, perpetrated by some of the young male students who attended Samvid-ji,  that did cause me sufficient concern to take that worry directly to him. Not because I expected there would be any action, but because I wished him to be on alert that this was unbecoming of Sandeepany. Had it continued, I would have gone to the Acharya, but clearly, this tiniest of protests took effect. It helped, too, that we were approaching our first Christmas, and Acharya-ji was singing my praises. 

Outside the ashram, I was a figure of bemusement for many. There are so few non-Indians who last long in gurukula! As time went on, the respect rose, and barriers were broken.