Intercaste Marriages.

[arvind1069]

i think u right upto some extent....jyada knowledge hone ke baad kai baar vichaar dhara ulta mor le leti hai.....as said by many educated elders....showing the same above thru your many quotes

anyways, as asked by you i made the google search also....badon ki baat maan ke bhi dekh li....and here's
the result of google search....

Caste (Sanskrit: Gyati ज्ञाति , Hindi: Biradari बिरादरी, samaj समाज, jati जाति etc , Urdu Zat ज़ात ) is an endogamous group. Generally a sub-caste is divided into Exogamous groups based on same gotras गोत्र.

link for this is....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_caste_system

ab bhi agar bacche ka gyaan adhura rah gaya ho to main aapki badi abhaari rahungi....ek baar soyi buddhi par prakash daaliye.....if you yourself have it

are badi jaldi par ke vaapis aa gayi. read more..read some vedic litereture. read every view point and then think freely,
anyways maine tumhe kaha tha ki jaati ka vo arth jo maine bataya tha vo google par shayad nahi mile. kyunki google, wikipidea, NCERT etc are based upon the conventional definations, and popular customs. they r more or less like text books jahan standard format main likha hota hai.

 

[choudharyneelam]

read some vedic litereture. read every view point and then think freely

fine....actually its not ur fault.....complexity is with the subject philosophy, which itself is very much debatable and then also u don't find the fixed solution but come out with a new philosophy

full n final.....my views r different and i expressed a lot, though very little

and if you follow the vedic kaal then follow all the principles of that period, but it seems u just want to discuss on the unending debatable issue if taken as per different kaal's statements related to same (marriage)

regards
neelam

 

[arvind1069]

fine....actually its not ur fault.....complexity is with the subject philosophy, which itself is very much debatable and then also u don't find the fixed solution but come out with a new philosophy

full n final.....my views r different and i expressed a lot, though very little

and if you follow the vedic kaal then follow all the principles of that period, but it seems u just want to discuss on the unending debatable issue if taken as per different kaal's statements related to same (marriage)

regards
neelam

mai bhi aur jyada kuch likhna jaroori nahi samajhta. vedic system ke baare main likhne se pehle usko ek baar dekh lo to behtar rahega. bina samjhe likhna is a sign of immaturity.
tumhare vicharon se mujhe aisa lagta hai jaise tumne orthodoxy aur cultural pride ko ek samajh liya hai. tumhe lagta hai ki orthodoxy, roohrivaad ko follow karke tum apne culture ko rich bana rahi ho. ab in sade gale usoolon aur paramparaon ko nikal ke phenk dena chahiye, jo hamari cultural tarakki main ek obstacle hai. un paramparaon ko follow karo jo logic aur humanity ke base par khari utarti hon, naaki popular custom par jo pichle kuch hazaar saal se indian culture main aaye hain

but nothing personal.. ye sirf is debate tak hi hai.. uske bahar koi gila shikwa nahi. theek hai?..smthings u wrote were directed personally to me. but meri taraf se aisa kuch nahi hai.

 

[choudharyneelam]

smthings u wrote were directed personally to me.

i feel bad, if anything i wrote made u feel like disrespected or hurt by my side.....though i didn't mean anything strong(rude or harsh) for anybody but i wrote all according to the replies

and abt my opinion....i simply disappreciate the unappealing wordings or statements whether indicated towards a particular person or the whole group.....and that's what i did

i do pay regards to u n ur distinctive thoughts as an individual.....but just for a general talk i wrote what i felt

and most importantly, if i'm sharing something then i put it without any boundations, otherwise i cannot.....restricted hoke likhti to shayad main bhi inter-caste marriage system se agree ya accept karti...but that's my nature, chahe maine bhahar ki duniya dekhi ho ya na....whether i've read a heap of books or not....some principles of mine don't allow me to accept few things

rest, i'm very much clear with few things which includes this too......

every woman has a unique capacity in herself due to which a custom is formed by the society that related to marriage....only a man can ride the female horse to bring the woman into his family after marriage...b'coz....only she has the capacity to :

• GIVE UP
• ADOPT

and like the way this custom is formed in every culture, similarly there are other things which are decided by us only and the same accepted by next....every custom so made has some logic behind that.....one i'm able to make clear here.....rest, is still not well-expressed and that's why not accepted by majority.....but, that's good that one carries his/her own opinion

 

[brahmtewatia]

and most importantly, if i'm sharing something then i put it without any boundations, otherwise i cannot.....restricted hoke likhti to shayad main bhi inter-caste marriage system se agree ya accept karti...but that's my nature, chahe maine bhahar ki duniya dekhi ho ya na....whether i've read a heap of books or not....some principles of mine don't allow me to accept few things

rest, i'm very much clear with few things which includes this too......

every woman has a unique capacity in herself due to which a custom is formed by the society that related to marriage....only a man can ride the female horse to bring the woman into his family after marriage...b'coz....only she has the capacity to :

• GIVE UP
• ADOPT

and like the way this custom is formed in every culture, similarly there are other things which are decided by us only and the same accepted by next....every custom so made has some logic behind that.....one i'm able to make clear here.....rest, is still not well-expressed and that's why not accepted by majority.....but, that's good that one carries his/her own opinion

appreciate yr individuality... kudos to you, gal. thumb rules r also made by individuals, to follow them or not is an individual perception.

 

[samarkadian]

Caste (Sanskrit: Gyati ज्ञाति , Hindi: Biradari बिरादरी, samaj समाज, jati जाति etc , Urdu Zat ज़ात ) is an endogamous group. Generally a sub-caste is divided into Exogamous groups based on same gotras गोत्र.

link for this is....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_caste_system

QUOTE]

Good going guys!! popped in to paste 2 excellent posts from older threads regarding to the present argument in this thread.Hope you would enjoy the excellent write up from the seniors. Here it goes!!


>>There are different theories about the establishment of the caste system in India; among them are religious-mystical, biological and socio-historical theories. However the most dominant is one created by the self-professed vigilantes, including some in our very own community! Almost anywhere you look around you will find a few of them, ready to draw the dagger. However, someone has aptly coined a phrase for them "might is right!" The commonest form of that might is prevalent in the form of rampant transgression.

The fact that the 3500-year-old caste system should survive in India today almost defies comprehension. It has been an aberration of the Hindu psyche. We Indians, who use lofty rhetoric about progress, characterizing our society as "united in diversity," seem to be simply perpetuating the system of social gradation that has blighted so many lives.

Social distinctions can still be discerned in our beloved, modern India even to this day in many ways. Low-caste people are forbidden to use the wells in villages that high-caste Brahmins use for fear they will pollute the water.

One particular instance that still stands fresh in my mind is when as a little girl, back in the childhood I used to fetch water from our village well and carry it home on my head. There was this young Brahmin woman at the well who used to ask me to help lift her pitcher. She would offer handful of water with the palms of her hands to ‘cleanse’ me. I followed the routine until I was 8 or 9 then one day as usual she asked me to help her out. I said, "Lady you have a choice… You could allow me to help you without the 'purity baggage' or wait here until a kinder soul comes to help you!" That was it! After that day I told all Brahmin women to find their own way to help themselves. Needless to mention it didn't' eradicate the social evil imposed by the Brahmins, but it did change mind of one little girl about caste and race relations!

I am bothered by some ignorant minds that despite having gone through similar unwarranted experiences have perpetuated the practice to this day. How can any human being be inferior to another without commiting act of indecency or an error? Even then shouldn't such judgment be bestowed by the Almighty himself? Incidentally, those of us who harbor illusion about us still being the ‘higher caste’ should try to comprehend the concept of OBC (Other Backward Classes). If we fall under this category then what makes us sacrosanct as a Jat caste? It's all in the mind, we are all humans. But then as they say, for some, "They leave the village but the village never leaves them!" You will be surprised how radical views some young minds have these days despite all the hoopla about the educational, technological and financial advances in India.

An Ancient Tradition

According to literature available, while scholars differ on the origins of the caste system in India, they agree that it is a very ancient institution. Some speculate that both the complexion and the occupations of the Aryans who invaded India around 1500 BC contributed to the growth of the caste system. The Aryan invaders, who spoke Indo-European languages, are believed by some to have been a fair-skinned, blue-eyed ethnic type. They dominated the darker-skinned original residents and made them subservient, much as the British did many centuries later.

According to the traditional Hindu view, human beings were divided into four categories on the basis of their intrinsic qualities. The highest caste, the Brahmins, were the thinkers, philosophers, and priests whose role was to provide both spiritual guidance and intellectual sustenance to the society. Originally, they lived on the charity of the people, given in return for the performance of various rites.

Next came the Kshatriyas, or Warriors, who were primarily concerned with the defense and governance of the state. The kings and rulers belonged to this caste. The third caste consisted of the Vaisyas, or Traders, who were involved in agricultural and commercial operations. In the fourth category were the Sudras, or Laborers. This caste, at the lowest rung of the hierarchical ladder, was responsible for various services, including menial jobs like scavenging and cleaning. They were considered "untouchable" and the three higher castes were not permitted to mingle with them. Marriage across caste lines was forbidden, and even now this taboo persists. Those who fall in love and marry in spite of the taboo risk excommunication from their castes.

This social system of gradation was given religious sanction by a verse in the ancient sacred writings of Hinduism and the earliest document of Indian history called the Rig-Veda. Believed to have been composed between 1500 and 1000 BC, it records that Brahmins came from the face of the creator, Kshatriyas from his arms, Vaisyas from his thighs, and Sudras from the soles of his feet. Members of the lowest caste were subjected to many restrictions in society.

There are also references to the four castes in the ancient epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata. A detailed description of the caste system is found in the Manusmriti (Ordinances of Manu), named for its author. The Manusmriti, which dates from AD 700, is the most authoritative work on Hindu law. Centuries later, the British rulers in India adopted it.

The status of the low caste continued to be degraded by the Brahmins. Even revolts against the high castes by religious leaders such as Mahavira (540-468 BC), the founder of Jainism, and Siddhartha Gautama (563-483 BC), the founder of Buddhism, failed to reduce the rigidity of the caste system because caste distinctions persisted in both religious sects.

Caste distinctions persisted even during the period of Muslim rule in India (1206-1862). The attempts of other religions, including Christianity and Judaism, to eradicate the caste system did not succeed because class distinctions persisted even in their folds.

The Beginnings of Change

It was the Industrial Revolution that finally made a dent in the caste system and brought a new awareness to Indians that social mobility might be possible. Industrialization encouraged urbanization, as villager dwellers of both high and low castes moved into the cities for better jobs, where they were introduced to new technologies. In the urban areas, the rigid, age-old, caste- centered thinking gave way to a more liberal outlook encouraging the mixing of castes without distinction. Trade unions and other associations had members from all castes working together.

The British government of India had a considerable, transforming impact on the country's Hindu social structure. The British brought change by passing many important laws designed to aid the marginalized lower castes--laws such as the Hindu Act, the Caste Disabilities Act, and the Widow Remarriage Act. But the British could not find a lasting solution to the problem of castes, particularly since the British saw themselves as a privileged ruling class.

The strongest, most systematic attack on the caste system has come in the twentieth century through the Constitution of India, adopted on November 26, 1949. India's constitution guarantees the right of all its citizens to justice, liberty, equality, and dignity. It has been a long and arduous journey from ancient caste distinctions based on Hindu philosophy and religious traditions to the constitutional pledge of a democratic government with equality, dignity, and justice for all human beings.

Now back to your question, "Has it done or does it do any good to anyone?" Sadly I do not believe racism does ‘any good’ to anyone! Racism or caste preferences can never be considered a good social practice. I am reminded of a famous saying, “you can not see the picture when you are inside the frame!” People have to come out of the rigid mindset to appreciate the worldview, and to accept people for as they are, than color of their skin or their caste! They need to take a train to South Africa or perhaps visit the Ghettos of New York to experience firsthand what racism does to the human soul. We come nearest to the great when we are great in humility. Finally, “the false can never grow into truth by growing in power.” (Tagore)

Regards,

Sujata

Ref:http://www.jatland.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6114&highlight=Intercaste+Marriage

 

[samarkadian]

Continuing here from Ravi ji's post in the same thread :-

1. Vedas and Caste.

This is the established dogma that the Vedas purport and support Varna /caste. The facts are that in the Rig Veda the oldest Veda, there is one hymn called the “ Purush SUktaM” hymn that suggested this, the one the Sujata refers to.

It is the 10th book. (Mandal).( the RV is now on line)

This is late Mandal, and this hymn is very probably a late interpolation in a late book.

The Rig Veda does not talk of Ksahtriya, Brahmin etc except for the one solitary verse.


In fact the Rig Veda is completely anti the Brahminical, customs that we have been spoon-fed over time and in our sonomolescence accepted unthinkingly.( which is our own fault, if we refuse to become literate)

The standard Hindu doctrine and the Rig Veda are a considerable variance from each other. in certain important areas;

: 1. Widow re marriage

The Rig Veda recommends it, the current form of Hinduism (Sanathan Dharma) vaishnavism, condemn it.

Guess what the Jats follow.

2. First cousin marriage.

This custom is totally taboo in Jat society, exists in Brahmin society especially in the south, and the East. The rajputs follow it, it is f\given sanctity by the Brahminical Hindu text.( If OK for Lord Krishna, it is OK for me!!)

In late texts, the Mahabharat, etc this is supposedly shown as an acceptable custom, and Krishna is shown as marrying his son Anriruddha to his sister's daughter. thus giving sanctity to the custom, by what becomes a Vaishnav avatar( Krishna).

The more I reflect on these issues, I realize there is much more to uncover and we should not accept these versions of our past uncritically.

Some Jat scholars have taken to Sanskrit and indological Studies.

How this came about is an area that needs more concentration by Jat scholars, who are willing to learn Sanskrit, Prakrit, etc and peel away the onion peels, behind which the original truth is hidden.

It is not common knowledge that most of the Rishis and over 60 clans in the RV are Jat Clans (Gotras). B S Dahiya wrote an excellent book bringing this fact out.

The RV is then essentially a Jat document, Jat Philosophy, History etc.

The Brahminical element comes in much later, in a historical timeline. There is some thinking the Brahmin priestly custom itself is not Aryan., but was grafted on the Aryan stem.

if you discuss this with Brahmin philosophers, they will get uptight and tell you that Hinduism is not just the RV, but also the other Vedas the other Hindu texts, smR^itis and so on and so on.

One core issue is why the discord between the RV and later Hinduism?


If this is addressed, it may do much to do away with intellectual base of the hoax of 4 Varna superiority/inferiority propagated over the ages


Ravi Chaudhary

Ref:- Post no-12 http://www.jatland.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6114&highlight=Intercaste+Marriage

 

[narenderkharb]

i feel bad, if anything i wrote made u feel like disrespected or hurt by my side.....though i didn't mean anything strong(rude or harsh) for anybody but i wrote all according to the replies

and abt my opinion....i simply disappreciate the unappealing wordings or statements whether indicated towards a particular person or the whole group.....and that's what i did

i do pay regards to u n ur distinctive thoughts as an individual.....but just for a general talk i wrote what i felt

and most importantly, if i'm sharing something then i put it without any boundations, otherwise i cannot.....restricted hoke likhti to shayad main bhi inter-caste marriage system se agree ya accept karti...but that's my nature, chahe maine bhahar ki duniya dekhi ho ya na....whether i've read a heap of books or not....some principles of mine don't allow me to accept few things

rest, i'm very much clear with few things which includes this too......

every woman has a unique capacity in herself due to which a custom is formed by the society that related to marriage....only a man can ride the female horse to bring the woman into his family after marriage...b'coz....only she has the capacity to :

• GIVE UP
• ADOPT

and like the way this custom is formed in every culture, similarly there are other things which are decided by us only and the same accepted by next....every custom so made has some logic behind that.....one i'm able to make clear here.....rest, is still not well-expressed and that's why not accepted by majority.....but, that's good that one carries his/her own opinion

Not going in the complex equations of Veda and Casta let me simply say ..


Great post Neelam.

Will like to quote Brahm here ....

Kudos ,That's like a Real Proud Jatni.

 

[choudharyneelam]

all well-expressed.....very clear and makes great sense

regarding various castes, categorising them as low or high is injusticiable....equal regard can be given for what they serve or make a stand as being a part of population.....what i feel, marriages in other castes also should be preferable but only if it doesn't hurt others sentiments......if it is disturbing life of others then for sure they will never experience a peaceful life for themselves....traditions, customs, values should be followed, otherwise no system will remain behind.....consideration is not just for caste system

....ok, for a second i forget about this caste groups.....n before that there was varna system....i forget about all these things

but think what can happen in present......somebody shared that Lord Krishna got his son married to his sister's daughter.....and then asked not to criticise it.....but if the same thing happen to our own family, then can this be permitted? NOT AT ALL

somewhere in holy epics another good thing is written about Lord Krishna.....some raja abducted and abused approx. 16000 ladies (including married and unmarried) and when Krishna released all those victim ladies by killing that raja, none of them were accepted by their lovables which again made their life more vulnerable as everybody outside started staring them with vulture's eyes...they asked Krishna, either He should kill all of them or they will become prostitute.....so to find the best solution, Krishna took it all to himself and married all those 16000 ladies to give them a respectful identity among others.....and they were very the most lucky b'coz Krishna was unaware from the meaning of lust....those ladies lived their life to their best....seems just an imaginable thought in today's world

now tell, how many of you gonna follow the same love with purity?.....can u look upon any lady with that true feelings and decide to marry her, without having considerations for degrees and other expected things (includes monetary terms also)??? b'coz u all going in the past history...so i also wanna take u there but at a little different place....and Krishna didn't asked anybody about their education/ family/beauty etc. etc. but still he made every lady feel happiest

why you go for the outer beauty?
why you go for qualifications? (our ancestors were very much able to teach us many things, though they themselves were illiterate)
why you go for a family status? (when you don't want bondations by caste, then why so by family condition/status/reputation?)

everybody says that love happens by itself....true....what way you want to define love? (just to satisfy man by his every desirable thing right from the time when he went out to find the most liked match?)

boundations were there and will always be there.....then only it speaks of a meaningful life which inturn teaches us the VALUES, very important as there are many who are judging you by values without even paying more attention towards your caste/society.....you respect urself on the basis of ur values first

boundations are there in our built houses.....u relax in one room, cook in another, eat in another (or maybe where you cook), study in another room....but then to enjoy party u go again in a bounded area where only few are invited (only known members).....so u all enjoying the life within a bounded area.....so why you wanna break the boundations of system?

 

[sumitsehrawat]

I am 'one' human being. Poor... with no home, living on the footpath. I have no food to eat, I am illiterate and I do not really get to enjoy parties. I get to see sky every night I lie down for a sleep. There's no fence around me so I am in no boundary. If you ask me, the entire world is mine. Am I the only one who can love outside caste? Oh... I forgot to tell you, I belong to no caste.
[This example was as bad as you gave while defining the 'boundations' of system. I don't understand the word 'boundations' though.]

Please let me know something:

There are corrupt ministers, police, lawyers, doctors and private-sector professionals and other government officials who we always seem to talk bad of. We have savage terrorists who end lives out of their whims at any time that they want. There are millions dying without food. There are female foeticides and there are those who buy girls(wives), there are child abusers, there are Nitharis, there are road accidents, there are dowry-burnings, there are beggars, and of course there are you and me. Deep in your heart you would acknowledge that this is one great part of our 'system'. Wouldn't you?

When we know this is our 'system' then why don't we just simply accept it? Why do we hurt other's sentiments by protesting or calling them names or acting in any manner (howsoever reasonable, vague, absurd, out-of-law) possible? Why do we want to end our pain and our suffering and that of others too...why? In not so appropriate words... "why do you wanna break the boundations of system?" [only if you understand where I am coming from...]

P.S.: Forget love-pove, I am only seeking an answer to the "boundations of system" joke. I don't quite understand it.

a
boundations are there in our built houses.....u relax in one room, cook in another, eat in another (or maybe where you cook), study in another room....but then to enjoy party u go again in a bounded area where only few are invited (only known members).....so u all enjoying the life within a bounded area.....so why you wanna break the boundations of system?

 

[sumitsehrawat]

Well... "Give up" and "Adopt" may be true in some cases, but to generalize I would say...

• COMPROMISE
  
• ADAPT (don't confuse it with adopt)

every woman has a unique capacity in herself due to which a custom is formed by the society that related to marriage..b'coz....only she has the capacity to :

• GIVE UP
• ADOPT

 

[choudharyneelam]

I am 'one' human being. Poor... with no home, living on the footpath. I have no food to eat, I am illiterate and I do not really get to enjoy parties. I get to see sky every night I lie down for a sleep. There's no fence around me so I am in no boundary. If you ask me, the entire world is mine. Am I the only one who can love outside caste? Oh... I forgot to tell you, I belong to no caste.
[This example was as bad as you gave while defining the 'boundations' of system. I don't understand the word 'boundations' though.

Boundaries here you taken with a little meaning…..ok, you expressing as per that boundaryless person, then answer…does the entire world also reflects the same to you?.....now if you blame this world that they are not good, then you have no goodness in your thoughts….you just want to get everything from the world but don’t want to provide anything from your side and thus only collects the pity from many…..that’s all you can do…….so boundation here I mean which joins/relates you to something…..this is how people are connected to each other…..and Unity in Diversity stands very true here….but this diversity is not accepted by people….b’coz they want this world to react according to one’s own choices

Please let me know something

There are corrupt ministers, police, lawyers, doctors and private-sector professionals and other government officials who we always seem to talk bad of. We have savage terrorists who end lives out of their whims at any time that they want. There are millions dying without food. There are female foeticides and there are those who buy girls(wives), there are child abusers, there are Nitharis, there are road accidents, there are dowry-burnings, there are beggars, and of course there are you and me. Deep in your heart you would acknowledge that this is one great part of our 'system'. Wouldn't you?

Right, I accept it as a part of BAD system….but who all are responsible behind that?.....people themselves…..who all never realized the cause of such happenings at their part…..they just started pin-pointing towards this caste system by developing a notion for a particular group as per their generalizations

think as per this situation…if you guys behave indecent with girls outside and then few more join you for the same, then that girl (who comes to know about ur caste identity) will only make the notion that Jats are like that…..and will always be disrespectful to that community then….so this brings the major difference how people behave as an individual…..they never try to throw out this bad element disturbing their personality but they start looking for the other change…..its easy to bring change in laws/constitution but very hard to polish your good deeds

I am only seeking an answer to the "boundations of system" joke.

Boudations simply makes you committed to something ……it does not restrict you but it teaches you what you are liable for …..the more you try to get out of the limits, the greater will be the suffering……but people today are in habit of changing everytime(though its good, but not everywhere)…..and the commitment is like a presssurised situation for them

 

[choudharyneelam]

Well... "Give up" and "Adopt" may be true in some cases, but to generalize I would say...

• COMPROMISE
  
• ADAPT (don't confuse it with adopt)

true....but again it is not from one side.....and when one tries to look at the other side then for sure even for generalization it will remain as :

• to give up
• to adopt

why it is taken so as per the way you said above, again due to demoralisation of a person's worth, the understanding shown by the same

so when a lady gives up for something, rather than praising her quality, other people and sometimes even those closely related to her call it just a compromise.....lady always does not demands, but she tries to make other also to understand her individuality....anyways....don't want to agrue on this as that's upto me, whether to go by others wordings or not

 

[rschhillar]

boundations....?

Boudations simply makes you committed to something ……it does not restrict you but it teaches you what you are liable for …..the more you try to get out of the limits, the greater will be the suffering……but people today are in habit of changing everytime(though its good, but not everywhere)…..and the commitment is like a presssurised situation for them

Neelam ji I really wish if boundations could make a person committed... then so many cases of arranged marriages going sour would not have happened.

"....the commitment is like a presssurised situation for them"

I feel this statement is more applicable to arranged (intra-caste) marriages where two people are not compatible with each other and as Sumit has said "COMPROMISE & ADAPT" would be more appropriate instead of "give-up & adopt" as the word 'give-up' shows that the woman is sacrificing,going for it unwillingly.Nowadays people are smart enough and can decide for themselves(even in intra-caste) and so the term 'give-up' does not make sense.

 

[sumitsehrawat]

Not-so-dear Neelam,

Thanks...!!

Take care...

...you just want to get everything from the world but don’t want to provide anything from your side and thus only collects the pity from many…..that’s all you can do…

 

[shweta123]

My views...

...............

why you go for the outer beauty?
why you go for qualifications? (our ancestors were very much able to teach us many things, though they themselves were illiterate)
why you go for a family status? (when you don't want bondations by caste, then why so by family condition/status/reputation?)

everybody says that love happens by itself....true....what way you want to define love? (just to satisfy man by his every desirable thing right from the time when he went out to find the most liked match?)

boundations were there and will always be there.....then only it speaks of a meaningful life which inturn teaches us the VALUES, very important as there are many who are judging you by values without even paying more attention towards your caste/society.....you respect urself on the basis of ur values first

boundations are there in our built houses.....u relax in one room, cook in another, eat in another (or maybe where you cook), study in another room....but then to enjoy party u go again in a bounded area where only few are invited (only known members).....so u all enjoying the life within a bounded area.....so why you wanna break the boundations of system?

Boundation connotes a stumbling block, hurdle or an impediment. And ‘values’ never bound anyone. To be something to be known as ‘value’ it requires to be universally thought to be acceptable and worth it. You cant key your ideology to be said to be ‘value’…… it needs to be unanimously defined.


Values is a set of beliefs, principles, liking etc to move forward with a specific culture and its sub-stems. It is ‘worthy to be universally liked’ rather than ‘imposing/making someone bound’.

Neelam, as pointed out appropriately by you that the people of today go for outer beauty, qualifications etc I would like to ask you to muse over this change in attitude and try looking for the reasons. What I see to be the reason is that with the passage of time, people do evolve for the better in terms of being more cogent, logical, and re-defining the earlier definitions of every realm, including the terms like ‘value’ !

Nowadays the ‘values’ speak of compatibility somehow !

And when we step out of our houses to party somewhere, why you think that we are moving from a bounded place to another? Rather, we are moving from an endearing and enjoyable place to another one. Where is the possibility of boundation? A home is a cozy corner which fills you with snugly comfort, it nowhere bounds you.

 

[arvind1069]

close the topic

ab ye topic apne subject se bahar jaa raha hai.
v got views from everybody and now that the purpose is solved, v shud close it now.

 

[choudharyneelam]

U all taking the word 'boundation' only to its limited meaning…..saying, which obstructs one ……but I wrote It in relation of togetherness, with which we all are connected......tying the sacred knot of two people to get married is also a 'BOUNDATION' saying that you can't live alone and i can't live without you, together we'll live, share, understand.....if you give up then i'm there for ur support, protection and every good care you need from my side.....but together we've to adopt each other as a common part called WE....so pls, frens don't bound the meaning of 'Boundation'

And Sumit, those wordings are not pointing towards you , but for the one whom you took as an example to explain your opinion….so don’t take it personally to urself

About VALUES, you(Shweta) said it well....but if you say these don’t come by any 'boundation'…..then what’s the purpose behind organizing morning assembly everyday in all schools?.....all students coming from different religions join hands to pray ONE GOD together…..this religion and social customs only are discussed when those little children grew-up and think themselves to be the most wise in every sense and thus finds it 'boundation'(as per ur and others' meaning) to step into a new relationship…..does the parents' worth stand only till they were immature or till they haven’t seen the outer world?.....why they feel like dying/penetrated by parents' decision?……what parents were able to understand, why can’t they try the same and find every relation beautiful?…..and what is that pushed them to look out for a person in other community?

…..choisng a person for whole life is not an easy task but that child is able to find one such in other community within two-three years or maybe in more time or might be within just few days…..when that child was not able to understand his/her parents well, then isn’t it the same thing i said about….."giving nothing but expecting everything"…..and instead of that, child only claims his/her right of birth from parents…..ridiculous……he/she always active in that situation to blame them by saying “ki humein zindagi deke uska ahsaan maang rahe hain”….heard it from some people and i think i observed the same somewhere in related topics…..extremely pathetic for lovely parents who were not aware what kind child they are going to bring in this world

And if talking about compatibility, still the reviews says and even many experienced people that inter-caste marriage is also not so successful, but an intra-catse is better than that…..and it seems very true and clear to me…..when parents were not understood, then how can the person coming from other family be understood so well.....but ya, i would agree that they can freely sign-up the divorce papers which agian comes as 'boundation' in intra-caste marriage as parents think always good for children.....but all this what i wrote is totally nonsense or orthodox(as per others' opinion)

anyways, .....here i repeat one statement again.....its better to go with anybody rather than trying yourself in 'boundations' due to parents.....nobody restricts anybody, if it was so, then there won't be any inter-caste marriage.....but these arguments take place b'coz that child neither wants to lose his/her love (chosen individually), nor he/she wants to lose all the cosy comforts of home and unconditional love always showered by his/her parents......and if it was not so, then those two people will just ignore their parents and move ahead.....but at last they have to do the same in 'boundation'....so one should break the 'boundations' there only where such clashes arise and enjoy the life completely in one's own style

 

[arvind1069]

Continuing here from Ravi ji's post in the same thread :-

1. Vedas and Caste.

This is the established dogma that the Vedas purport and support Varna /caste. The facts are that in the Rig Veda the oldest Veda, there is one hymn called the “ Purush SUktaM” hymn that suggested this, the one the Sujata refers to.

It is the 10th book. (Mandal).( the RV is now on line)

This is late Mandal, and this hymn is very probably a late interpolation in a late book.

The Rig Veda does not talk of Ksahtriya, Brahmin etc except for the one solitary verse.


In fact the Rig Veda is completely anti the Brahminical, customs that we have been spoon-fed over time and in our sonomolescence accepted unthinkingly.( which is our own fault, if we refuse to become literate)

The standard Hindu doctrine and the Rig Veda are a considerable variance from each other. in certain important areas;

: 1. Widow re marriage

The Rig Veda recommends it, the current form of Hinduism (Sanathan Dharma) vaishnavism, condemn it.

Guess what the Jats follow.

2. First cousin marriage.

This custom is totally taboo in Jat society, exists in Brahmin society especially in the south, and the East. The rajputs follow it, it is f\given sanctity by the Brahminical Hindu text.( If OK for Lord Krishna, it is OK for me!!)

In late texts, the Mahabharat, etc this is supposedly shown as an acceptable custom, and Krishna is shown as marrying his son Anriruddha to his sister's daughter. thus giving sanctity to the custom, by what becomes a Vaishnav avatar( Krishna).

The more I reflect on these issues, I realize there is much more to uncover and we should not accept these versions of our past uncritically.

Some Jat scholars have taken to Sanskrit and indological Studies.

How this came about is an area that needs more concentration by Jat scholars, who are willing to learn Sanskrit, Prakrit, etc and peel away the onion peels, behind which the original truth is hidden.

It is not common knowledge that most of the Rishis and over 60 clans in the RV are Jat Clans (Gotras). B S Dahiya wrote an excellent book bringing this fact out.

The RV is then essentially a Jat document, Jat Philosophy, History etc.

The Brahminical element comes in much later, in a historical timeline. There is some thinking the Brahmin priestly custom itself is not Aryan., but was grafted on the Aryan stem.

if you discuss this with Brahmin philosophers, they will get uptight and tell you that Hinduism is not just the RV, but also the other Vedas the other Hindu texts, smR^itis and so on and so on.

One core issue is why the discord between the RV and later Hinduism?


If this is addressed, it may do much to do away with intellectual base of the hoax of 4 Varna superiority/inferiority propagated over the ages


Ravi Chaudhary

lord krishna didnt married his son to his sister. mahabharat found today is not in its original form. for centuries cunning and selfish people have added certain unacceptable concepts in it to solve their own purpose. the original mahabharat (called Jaya kavya) had 10000 shlokas, but the mahabharat found today contains more than 1 lakh shlokas. so all these are impurities added my sampradayik people of different cults with a selfish motive. so dont blindly accept everything that is written in mahabharat and ramayan, as they are adulterated a lot in past.

 

[hoodarajesh]

yaaro jo intercaste marriage kai haaq mai hai wo bahut acchi misal kayam kar rahai hai agai anai walo kai liyai or mai to kahta hu ki chamar chudai tali nai dhobi dhanak in sab mai jis ka jahan dil karai shadi karai jo intercaste marriage cahtai hai or baki ham jaisai pichdo ko pichda hi rahnai dai
waisai in sab ki boli bhi alag trah ki hoti hai matlab kai chamar ki boli kuch es tarah ki hoti hai
tai chaca kiyanh gaya tha :d:d
bhai karo khub karo intercaste marriage par or kisi ko bhi kyo mashwara dai rahai ho :boxing

भाई और किसी जाती में ब्याह तो करना ही नही चाहिए .इसमे आदमी की पहचान
ख़त्म हो जाती है . फ़िर बच्चे अपने नाम के पीछे माँ की जाती
का गोत लगायेंगे तो बाप का पहचान खत्म . और बाप का जाती का लगायेंगे
तो माँ की पहचान ख़त्म . इंदिरा गाँधी ने अब्दुला खान से शादी की थी .
राजीव गाँधी और संजय गाँधी ने अपनी माँ का गोत लगाया तो अब्दुला
का तो आस्तित्व ही ख़त्म हो गया के नही . और हमारे जाटो में
पड़े लिखे लड़के और लड़किया बहुत है . कम से कम हमें तो इन
बातो से बचना चाहिए और सभी को अपनी पहचान कायम रखनी चाहिए ,