Thread: purushasuktam - varna

discussion so far:

Originally Posted by happyhindu

Shri TBS ji,

Since you quote Purushasuktham as pramana for varna, am putting forth something, wud like to hear your views on them:

Brahmanah asya mukhaasit:
Popular meaning: Brahmins are the face or head (of the purusha).
Uttaramimansa meaning: The consciousness that leads to cosmic consiousessness, is in the region of the brain. Head represents brahmana, because it represents one who has attained awareness of that region thru yog or has attained his consciousness..in other words it means brahma janati iti brahmana, one whose mind is merged with brahman in meditation is a brahmin.

Vaahuh rajanyah kritah:
Purvamimansa meaning: Hands represent rajanya (kshatriya).
Uttaramimansa interpretation: One who works with his hands is rajanya. Because the terms vaahuh-kritah are not mentioning that hands "became" rajanya of the metaphysical purusha, literal meaning cud be also be one who "does" his hands is rajanya (or 'works' his hands is rajanya) based on kritah = done, made, performed.

Urutahah asya yat vaishya:
Popular interpretation: The thighs became vaishyas.
Monastic interpretation: thigh represents lap, like lap of Lakshmi, where money is saved. Asya = is of, of this. Therefore thighs is of vaishya, one who saves of money is of vaishya. Wud apply to any one who works to earn and save money, or one who works in an office, etc.

Padvyam shudrah ajayata (most popular sentence of all i guess ):
Shudra was born from the feet (of the purusha). Padavyam = of the feet, from the feet, or one who is 'of the feet' is a shudrah, or one who supports is a shudrah, or any subordinate who supports is a shudrah, can be applied to anyone working as a subordinate under a boss to support the functions of an office, or to a minister supporting a king.

In the later times,
a) brahmin became applied to the priestly class even though they did not engage their mind in meditation but were ritualists,
b) rajanya became applied to a kshatriya though it referred to a tiller of land before villages developed into a civilized form of an administered unit. The basis of vaahuh rajanya kritah appears to come from the fact that in the rigved times, one who tilled the land was treated as a crop giver, a saviour.
c) vaishya became applied to one who walks to save, since feet are extension of the thighs that help walk, that is it became applied to primitive sellers in a village,
d) and shudrahs that was meant to be be "anyone who serves" became applied to people who were kept as the labor classes by the dharmashastras.

In reality, the purushasuktam was not to show 4 diff castes as varnas, but to show functionary systems of the human body. In other words, each person has all '4 castes' or '4 varnas' in him. To the monastic traditions, all that the purushasuktam explains to man is his own self as the mythical purusha, and methods of union with the brahman.

The feet being the most sensitive part of the body with several acupressure points, were first managed and handled thru yog, to help man conquer his sense of desire to serve, to earn appreciation, money, etc. Then the overcame his thighs, or desire to save money and reproduce. Then he overcame his hands, or movement of fingers and neck at the vishuddha chakra. Finally, the union of mind with the superconsiouness brahman happened.

Shri TBS-ji, what are your views on the differences in the explanations b/w the purvamimansaka dharmashastra followers and those of monasticism schools.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by tbs

hi HH ji,
I dont want deviate the original thread called ' widows and
hindu /brahmin tradition'...i feel that i already deviated..
sorry for that...i can explain about purvamiamsaka dharmasaastra/
and uttara mimansaka siddhantas...but im not scholar in
purvamimamsa dharmasastra...i have limited knowledge..

regards

Originally Posted by happyhindu

i think almost all posts in this thread do not pertain to the topic of the thread.

perhaps we can continue the discussion here and then ask Praveen to move them to a new thread.

so you may please continue with the explanations.

thanks.

Originally Posted by happyhindu

discussion so far:

hi HH
thank u for ur new thread...but i have limited know jaimineeya
purvamimsaka.......im basically specialization in advaitha...
but i learned little sayana bashya in purva mimamsa...

regards

Originally Posted by tbs

hi HH
thank u for ur new thread...but i have limited know jaimineeya
purvamimsaka.......im basically specialization in advaitha...
but i learned little sayana bashya in purva mimamsa...

regards

but sir that is a lot, its not at all easy to be specialized in advaitha...

am sure you must have come across differences in the way purusha suktam is explained by diff schools, please cud you explain why these differences seem to exist?

Originally Posted by happyhindu

but sir that is a lot, its not at all easy to be specialized in advaitha...

am sure you must have come across differences in the way purusha suktam is explained by diff schools, please cud you explain why these differences seem to exist?

hi
i do purusha suktha parayanam daily in my daily abhisheka...
im not interested in different opinions...even i dunno...

regards

About Prusha Suktha and Varna post by happyhindu.

He says that the narration in Purusha suktham does not refer to the conventional four varnas of society, but are with respect to the limbs of the same body and hence "each person has allfour castes or varnas in him". But Sir, Vedas and Shastras enjoin particular varna or caste to do particular Karmas, for example a fourth varna man can not perform Yaga according to shastras. With happyhindu's explanation quoted above how this is possible.

Originally Posted by S Sankaranarayanan

About Prusha Suktha and Varna post by happyhindu.

He says that the narration in Purusha suktham does not refer to the conventional four varnas of society, but are with respect to the limbs of the same body and hence "each person has allfour castes or varnas in him". But Sir, Vedas and Shastras enjoin particular varna or caste to do particular Karmas, for example a fourth varna man can not perform Yaga according to shastras. With happyhindu's explanation quoted above how this is possible.

Sri. Sankaranarayanan,

Sow.Sri. Happy Hindu refers Uttara Mimansa, Pooravameemansa etc when she says that everyone has four varnas. Personally I agree with that. I do not know any of the philosophies quoted by Sow.Happy Hindu. It is logical. Sir, have you ever thought that Vedas and shastras may have been wrongly interpreted?

Kindly read post#23 in this link, please.

Who is Brahmanan

Cheers!

Sow.Sri.Happy Hindu said:-

"Padvyam shudrah ajayata (most popular sentence of all i guess ):
Shudra was born from the feet (of the purusha). Padavyam = of the feet, from the feet, or one who is 'of the feet' is a shudrah, or one who supports is a shudrah, or any subordinate who supports is a shudrah, can be applied to anyone working as a subordinate under a boss to support the functions of an office, or to a minister supporting a king."

Sri. Happy Hindu,

I beg to differ with the views written in the quote. You have already covered this quality in the Vaishya varna. that is one who is working to make an earning and who saves money. Then, how are you classifying them again as Sudhra? It does not make sense for me.

To my understanding, every person when doing any legal, dharmic and honest work, adapts one of the three varnas namely brahma, kshatriya and vaishya. When that person involves in an illegal, adharmic or dishonest work, then he is a sudhra. This would apply to all the persons across the board in any community. The period he/she remains as a sudhra would be decided by the elders or panchayat or courts. In the present day situation, such persons are imprisoned or made to pay a penalty. I am looking forward to hear your opinions on this, please.

Cheers!

Nice to see this thread being revived


Dear Sri Raghy ji,

Abt the purushasuktam explanation, a better explanation of the one i have is given, is in this book: Amazon.com: Kriya Yoga (9788120831414): P. Hariharananda: Books

The monastic folk i have spoken to, do not consider purushasukta as an interpolation into the rigved. Well, since the monastic folk predominantly belong to the yoga, samkhya, vaisheshika, vedanta schools, their interpretation of the purushasuktam, i suppose, is based on their school of thot.

To them, Shudra simply means a person who does not have his desires in control, meaning he does not understand himself. The best way to understanding the self (to them), is sheer surrender.

A Vaishya is one who has some amount of control, understands himself somewhat, but only to the extent that he understand he is self-centered. He has not yet learnt to become the master (kshatriya) of his desires.

While some ekadandis do not speak of jaatis / occupations at all, some do.

Of them, some monastic traditions do accept that gunas / qualities can be applied to professions (the only diff is that they do not believe that jaatis / occupations are fixed and unchangable by birth).

And according to them, when applied to occupations, a shudra, wud mean a servile person. And a vaishya was someone who saved money. A person with enough ability, and savings capacity, can move from being a shudra (an apprentice or a pauper in service) to a vaishya (money owner, better settled person).

In terms of professions professed, there seems to be little diff b/w the vaishya and shudra occupations. Am told that some smrithis consider cattle-tending, farming, etc as jobs of the vaishyas, while some consider the same jobs as that of the shudras. Perhaps the way occupations were defined in diff regional areas of old india varied.



Dear Sri Sankaranarayana ji,

There were 2 sects in the past (pre-shankara period) --
a) the upanishadic type wandering monks or just monks who predominently followed (and follow) the vedanta or uttaramimansa school; and,

b) the ritualistic type stationary priests, who predominantly followed (and follow) the purva mimansa school.

Each has their own explanation of the purushasuktam.

The vedantin or uttaramimansa monks beleive that, in the past, anyone cud be recruited into the profession of priesthood.

It may be possible that they consider it that way because yagas were also performed by some sects of ascetics (monks) in the past, and they wud pass on the knowledge to their students.

Its likely that this was before the days when the society became rigid into the mold where a profession, passed on from father to son, within the family (as also family secrets such as vaidyam (medicine) recipes).

I do not know if the current purvamimansa based schools accept that explanation. As far as i know, no they do not.

Kindly also note that the vedic society (as is debated) supposedly did not have the shudra section, either in terms of occupations (as is considered by the dharmashastras); or in terms of the varna classification itself, since the word shudra is rarely mentioned in the vedas.

Some say 'shudra' in the mahabharat refers to the name of a tribe that was enemies with the vedic tribes; and speculate that this word 'shudra' became applied to define occupations in the dharmashastra times (since the word denoted an outsider or an enemy).

Some say the shudra tribe was also an arya tribe, but non-vedic, like the dasas / dasyus and the panis, and that the scenario actually referred to intra-tribal warfare, meaning like cousin-brothers fighting with one another.

Some say the shudra tribe was one of the many tribes that entered india from the northwest as indo-scythians, but became merged with the existing traditions over time (probably after some resistance).

Whatever it was, today, we all remain mixed some way or the other. In terms of genetics, each of us carry part of the old and part of the new within us.

But based on the idea that the term shudra did not refer to a varna in any vedic text, some argue that the interpretation of purushasuktam as varnas-related-to-occupations is wrong.

Please also note that Vatsa, a descendant of Kanva, was called a shudra putra (in rigveda). Also Ambedkar asked in the book 'who were the shudras' about Sudas. He asks, how come Sudas, a shudra, was a composer of rigvedic hyms.

Anyways, what you mention about each profession (caste) performing certain karmas, is based on the dharmashastras. The vedas, as just hyms, poetry, astronomy, or simply as "knowledge texts" do not mention any such thing.

Regards.

Originally Posted by happyhindu

.... Please also note that Vatsa, a descendant of Kanva, was called a shudra putra (in rigveda). Also Ambedkar asked in the book 'who were the shudras' about Sudas. He asks, how come Sudas, a shudra, was a composer of rigvedic hyms.

Dear HH, I know where you are coming from, so I fully understand what you are saying. There is definitely value in understanding the antecedents of caste and varna, Similarly, I think you will agree with me that the present condition must also be clearly understood.

In this regard, the Rg Vedic verse in question is universally interpreted by all Vedantic schools, with the exception some you mention, to mean birth based varna. I suspect even in the case of the Ekadandi acharyas, the followers adhere to caste & Varna in their practical lives, just as much as anyone else, such as arranged marriage etc.

Cheers!

p.s.
Some years back I wanted to learn a little bit of Sanskrit when I was in Chennai for an extended stay. A freind hooked me up with an elderly Veda teacher. He misundertood my intent and thought I wanted to learn Vedas. When I saw him for the first time he made me recite my Abivadaye. After I did, he cited this Rg Vedic verse, which I already was aware of as I used to recite the five sukthas everyday (yes, hard to believe isn't), and told me that some Shudras tried to pass off as brahmins in order to learn Vedas from him and he needed to be vigilant and that was the reason he made me recite my Abivahdaye