12-16-2005, 10:05 AM
Sunder,
Sri Krishna is otherwise very precise in Gita. Why would he say that he created the four varnas according to Guna (attributes) and Karma (actions) if he meant Jati (birth)? It is much more straightforward to take his words literally. One can argue that "Jati" interpretation is an extrapolation.
Also Gita's message is supposed to be eternal. Why should it be tied down to certain caste system based on birth that may have existed during Sri Krishna's lifetime? Although it probably was true that caste by birth was there during the Mahabharata age.
The justification that a child's attributes may be determined by his childhood experiences etc is very valid. But again we fall back on "guNa", don't we? So, ultimately the "Gunas" and "Karmas" are the true deciding factors.
As a counterexample for Dharmaputra YudhiShthira's example, maharshi Vishwamitra was born kShatriya and became BrAhmaNa.
In Gita there is also a mention of the dangers of VarNa-saMkaratA (mixing of the varNas). What does that mean?
I would say, YudhiShthira is a good example of varNa-saMkaratA. He is a mixture of Brahaman traits and kShatriya traits. Neither here nor there. And one can argue that that can lead to weakening as conflicting tendencies will cause much inner turmoil and take their toll. While someone with no such conflicts can perform his duties much more efficiently. In that sense varNa-saMkaratA may arise not so much from inter-caste marriages but mainly from inter varNa marriages, i.e. marriages where guNa and karma were not matched. If guNa and karma are matched, then marriages even across caste lines may be fruitful and should be considered marriages within the same varNa and not an example of varNa-saMkaratA.
Sri Krishna is otherwise very precise in Gita. Why would he say that he created the four varnas according to Guna (attributes) and Karma (actions) if he meant Jati (birth)? It is much more straightforward to take his words literally. One can argue that "Jati" interpretation is an extrapolation.
Also Gita's message is supposed to be eternal. Why should it be tied down to certain caste system based on birth that may have existed during Sri Krishna's lifetime? Although it probably was true that caste by birth was there during the Mahabharata age.
The justification that a child's attributes may be determined by his childhood experiences etc is very valid. But again we fall back on "guNa", don't we? So, ultimately the "Gunas" and "Karmas" are the true deciding factors.
As a counterexample for Dharmaputra YudhiShthira's example, maharshi Vishwamitra was born kShatriya and became BrAhmaNa.
In Gita there is also a mention of the dangers of VarNa-saMkaratA (mixing of the varNas). What does that mean?
I would say, YudhiShthira is a good example of varNa-saMkaratA. He is a mixture of Brahaman traits and kShatriya traits. Neither here nor there. And one can argue that that can lead to weakening as conflicting tendencies will cause much inner turmoil and take their toll. While someone with no such conflicts can perform his duties much more efficiently. In that sense varNa-saMkaratA may arise not so much from inter-caste marriages but mainly from inter varNa marriages, i.e. marriages where guNa and karma were not matched. If guNa and karma are matched, then marriages even across caste lines may be fruitful and should be considered marriages within the same varNa and not an example of varNa-saMkaratA.