Shri Nara,
Yes i do reckon that my communication is not clear. When it comes to the topic of religion, I have been told that quite a few times before as well
To surmise, i cud say this:
1) As such, while discussing each time, it is difficult to mention the references. But if there is any point, where you seek references, please do mention so, i will provide the sources.
2) Whatever i have expressed about jaati not being by birth is the POV of the non-shankara advaitins. This is based on talking with them. To be specific - it is based on the POVs of the Saraswati, Giri and Swami sects. And they claim that their views of varna is common to all advaita sampradayams. But to me, it does not tally with the jaati-dharma explanations of the kanchi mutt.
When these non-shankra ekadandis are questioned directly about how different their teachings are from those of the kanchi mutt, their most common response is only silence. They are happy to express their POVs, they can also touch upon why the kanchi views are not really ok, but they will never say anything that can offend anyone.
If a varna was assigned to me at the end of the formative years in a gurukulam system, I would have been branded for life of servitude to the varnas of stature with no opportunity for movement.
The occupation asssigned post-gurukulam years is not a rigid one. To them, mainly varna is not jaati (occupation)) (or atleast, not in the sense that is propagated by the shankara mutts, as being rigid by birth). But they accept that varna came to be linked with jaathi as an unfortunate outcome of the ages, over time. However, they do not consider jaathi as birth-based - and that i think is the biggest diff b/w shankara and non-shakara advaita followers.
If a child showed aptitude is handling money, he was taught the art of trade, revenue, management, etc. But if he showed aptitude for the martial arts, he was trained as such. But that did not mean that a man trained in martial arts can never attempt to run a trade guild. So a man can be warrior cum administrator at one time, trader at an other time, or he can chose a life of spiritualism.
Let us also take into consideration that the number of occupations in semi-tribal societies were not many at that time.
I have heard Brahmins say that everyone is born shudra, and at upanayanam, one becomes whatever Varna one is born into. Since there is no upanayanam for Shudras, they remain Shudra for life.
This is the dharmashastra view. To the non-shankara advaitins, upanayanam only makes one a brahmachari, not a brahmin. Only when a man finally attains brahma-jnanam, he becomes a brahmin.
To the non-shankara advaitins, there is nothing called a shudra jaati. Sects that also teach purva mimansa ritualism to the students, conduct upanayanam for all their students. One unique example is that of the naga babas who conduct upanayam - they will be out this kumbh mela - so it wud be interesting for anyone who wants to talk to them to know abt their traditions.
If any of the ekadandis do conduct upanayanam, then upon sanyasam, however, 'almost all' ekadandis remove the thread (and they no longer perform rituals). I used the word "almost all" since I do not know about the unexplored traditions. There are very many ekadandi traditions that remain unexplored. So it is difficult to say with surety about their traditons as a whole. All I can is that if any of the students did undergo upanayanam, then upon sanyasam, the dasanamis (the ten names / sects of ekadandis) do not keep wear the thread.
Before Adi Shankara, there were a plethora of gods and goddesses, but Adi shankara streamlined hinduism to include only 6 dieties as main ones. Later Ramanuja streamlined hinduism to only Vishnu and his avataras and Lakshmi as main dieities. That does not mean, all the traditions before Shankara and Ramanuja, are not mainstream hinduism. They many not be popular as "popular hinduism", but they are part and parcel of everything that is there in hindusim. However, what we are talking abt today is "popular hindusim", that happened after the 8th century.
So the concept of who is a brahmin, has also undergone change. What the shankara mutts express, came to be the " popular hindusim "(and i think its thanks also to the british, apart from shakara and ramanuja, for popularizing that versions).
To me, the concepts expressed by the non-shankara mutts are those of mainstream ones, but not of "popular hindusim". These monks have always lived a quiet spiritual life away from social polity (and have adviced people only when their advice is sought), unlike the shankara mutts that propagate dharmashastras (shastras that control social structures, and interfere directly with social polity).
But this is not the same as what you are saying, if I understand you correctly. if nobody is assigned to Shudra varna, then what is the need for mentioning the Shudra varna in the Rg Veda?
Their interpretation of the whole purusha suktam is rather elaborate. Rather complicated i wud say. Am not blessed with that kind of writing skills to explain the whole content. But i can only say this - shudra mentioned in the rigvedic verse, to them, does not refer to occupations.
