I always thot indians are cultural representative of old socio-religious structural divisions. No caste can claim to be an ethnically exclusive group atleast in terms of biological descent. But if one claims exclusive biological descent or failsafe descent he should be able to prove it.Ji,
since this is an indian social issue, and so i have referred indian hindu undivided family inheritance law, which was framed mainly based on the hindu philosophy 'pious obligation'.
unlike u.s law of inheritance of ancestral properties, as per indian law, by default the assets goes to the children, so are the debts. for eg, the said father must have inherited estate from his great great grandfathers, but borrowed money and died without paying. the 10th generation ancestral property will come to the son automatically, and also his debts.
you know,our custom/culture/philosophy/hindu inheritance laws emphasize,that every one to take the responsibility of the good or bad done by the ancestors.if its an inheritance of assets, get cherished, and if its debt repay it (or) apologize to seek waiver. that's the foundation of the hindu philosophy of 'pious obligation'.
if one takes proud in ancestors,glorifies him in all the rituals, then by any logic,and with the same yard stick, one should accept the mistake of the same. or else, one should have been adopting the policy, he is 'dead and gone'.
i'm not here to debate which community to apologize whom! all i know is, tendering an apology is always good and beneficial to both the persons. this is what i have explained in one of the previous post
however in one of your response, you expressed your apprehension that, tendering an apology may develop hatred or adverse effects. would be nice, if you could quote some incidences from history, that, tendering an apology had turned out to be a wrong move.
Also, if one claims descent from Manu, s/he is automatically responsible for the negative side too, not just the glorious side. IMO this apology business will apply to those who think they have had failsafe biological descent from creators of Dharmashastras like Manu.
IMO this apology business will not apply to those who consider themselves as just cultural representatives. "Cultural representatives" are those who do not claim biological descent from Manu and include those whose recent ancestors adopted dharmashastras in the process of sankritisation and/or brahmanisation.
Also, way back there have been europeans trading with india (examples are roman coins found in archeological sites of tamilakam). There are no guarantees where those settlers went. Considering they were traders and well-placed, for all we know, they may have chosen a high-class position for themselves or merged with the natives along with their pre-christian religious concepts (like worship of Mitra).
IMO it will be very difficult, atleast as of now, to prove biological descent (let alone failsafe descent) from IE speakers all the way from vedic period or from the dharmashastra period, for any caste group, irrespective of B or NB.
Nice post Shiv. Although i do not agree with the apology business.