Some good points here and in post #69. Somehow multi-quote reply is not working so I can only quote this one message.
Hit the reply button on all posts that you want to quote and it will stack them in your reply.
Good thread BTW
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Some good points here and in post #69. Somehow multi-quote reply is not working so I can only quote this one message.
I might be prejudiced but I don't think Arabs or any other religion originators, so to say, hold their own co-religionists hold in any special regard.Some good points here and in post #69. Somehow multi-quote reply is not working so I can only quote this one message.
To clarify - I do not expect Arabs to give special treatment to muslims. The only reason I brought up Islam and muslims in the topic and my initial post is the irony of Arabs considering themselves the original muslims but acting against the basic tenets of Islam. The reason I also mentioned their racism even against fellow muslims was to highlight that their prejudiced behavior is not stemmed from religious superiority ("we are believers and look down on the non-believers") but more of true racism.
There is no technicality here. Caste system has evolved to be a form of discrimination. But it is not race based.It might not be racism in the technical sense, but it works in more or less the same fashion. You mention dharma there, but before the RSS pioneers decided hinduism was too religion based, dharma meant a person ended up a low caste by birth as part of his or her dharma, and they couldn't escape that dharma during their lifetime.
Hence they were treated as lesser beings in the same way a racist would grade some races as lesser.
Caliphate was under strict Arab rule for only 3 centuries at best.Honestly, I don't see Arab attitudes as racism but more as nouveau riche snobbery.
I don't think there's a lot of history of this behaviour. From what I know, for most of their medium-term history, Arabs were ruled by the Turks, Brits etc. Movies in the 60s, 70s show them either as fawning - effendi, effendi types or noble savages. Sudden oil money and being served by a range of nationalities and everyone begging for their money has probably turned them a bit arrogant like any arrivistes or lottery winners.
Perhaps Muslims expect some special consideration given the common religion and perceive an extra racism when they don't get it. As far as most others are concerned, I don't think Arabs are seen as particularly racist - more as vulgar, tasteless and perhaps exploitative and uncaring.
There is no technicality here. Caste system has evolved to be a form of discrimination. But it is not race based.
Caste system was alright for as long as there was fluidity in it. Any educated person could be a Brahmin. Any skilled Artisan or Gold smith can become a Shudra or any skilled swordsman could become a Kshatriya. When the lines between various castes became rigid, it became discriminatory.
You cannot equate anything to racism. Any discrimination based on skin color or facial features is considered racist. Varnashrama Dharma does not quality for it.
Revisionist? Varnashrama Dharma is as old as India itself. It existed in all cults in India and it was fluid.I'm sorry but that sounds like a revisionist history of Hindu religion, maybe you are giving me the version pioneered by Gowalkar and the RSS movement. But he was an atheist from the 20th century who ridiculed his own religion (Hinduism) and tried to rebuild a new identity based on cultural nationalism.
One of the many reasons I like this forum. Across many topics we also get pretty interesting side discussions. I do not know much about Hinduism so I felt like I learned some new things here (I did have to google quite a few terms in this message). Good stuff!Revisionist? Varnashrama Dharma is as old as India itself. It existed in all cults in India and it was fluid.
Manusmriti is only about 1400 years old. The groups were codified and became rigid after that. There are many instances of Shudras becoming Brahmins and Brahmins becoming Kshatriyas or Vaishyas or Shudras.
The famous sage Valmiki who wrote Ramayan is a tribal person who became a Brahmin.
The Saptarishis do not have castes. All of the 4 castes call these Rishis as their progenitors.
Revisionist? Varnashrama Dharma is as old as India itself. It existed in all cults in India and it was fluid.
Manusmriti is only about 1400 years old. The groups were codified and became rigid after that. There are many instances of Shudras becoming Brahmins and Brahmins becoming Kshatriyas or Vaishyas or Shudras.
The famous sage Valmiki who wrote Ramayan is a tribal person who became a Brahmin.
The Saptarishis do not have castes. All of the 4 castes call these Rishis as their progenitors.
Your karma in this life is going to affect your next life. The cycle of birth and death will continue until the soul gets moksha. It is common for all cults in India.What I learned of the caste system at school was that the caste system was linked to dharma, and a reflection of your previous life hence reincarnation. I also read that the only way to move up the caste ladder is to observe the rules of your own caste strictly in you current life. This seems to be the reality of how Hindus have actually thought for the vast majority of recorded history.
Give it another 50 years, no one will care about caste in India. Inter caste marriages have picked up pace and it will only accelerate in the future with the older generations fading away.
Foreigners would generally be classified as 'Mlechhas' - outside or by some interpretations below the caste system.That is because due to exposure to the rest of the world via digital connectivity such ideas look ridiculous - not because there was some hidden truth in the original idea of inherent or incarnated social divisions. The western world does not believe in castes yet they are the first world and India is third world. What caste would Americans or the British Raj be classified as?
After the Glen Hoddle incident in the UK people became very careful about disclosing these types of belief. In fact they aren't very mainstream.That is because due to exposure to the rest of the world via digital connectivity such ideas look ridiculous - not because there was some hidden truth in the original idea of inherent or incarnated social divisions. The western world does not believe in castes yet they are the first world and India is third world. What caste would Americans or the British Raj be classified as?
Caste system is fading away because people don’t follow any of its rules. This is like following Islam and eating pork and doing adultery.That is because due to exposure to the rest of the world via digital connectivity such ideas look ridiculous - not because there was some hidden truth in the original idea of inherent or incarnated social divisions. The western world does not believe in castes yet they are the first world and India is third world. What caste would Americans or the British Raj be classified as?