The protest by medical students and doctors to the move to hike reservations for OBCs in higher educational institutions has not led to a rethink. But it has certainly prompted some moves to ensure that deserving students are not completely sidelined. The Prime Minister has set up a four-member cabinet team to come up with a formula that will be more acceptable.
But what is the solution? Should the number of IITs be increased to 70, as suggested by Knowledge Commisison chief Sam Pitroda? Should the number of seats in colleges be increased to accommodate meritorious students, as proposed by many, including Arjun Singh?
Is more merrier? Or will increasing seats kill our institutions, as feared by IIM-A board member, N.R. Narayana Murthy? Will having to add another 22,000 seats spell disaster to academic standards, not to speak of the campus atmosphere?
Is affirmative action like in the US the solution? Instead of blanket reservations should we give weightage to OBCs, as practised in Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and as suggested by sociologist Dipankar Gupta? Join the debate.
There can be no question that the backward classes, especially the economically backward be they in the upper castes or lower castes, require a leg up. But governments and politicians need to avoid the temptation of doing this for electoral or political reasons, as has become the case. To that end, a small hike in admittance will help offset the planned 27 per cent hike. But this has to be one-off, not an endless process. The creamy layer should be kept out and the children of the beneficiaries of these reservations should not be eligible. We need water-tight caste certification to avoid fakes. Likewise, 70 may be too high a number but surely Pitroda is not wrong to suggest that a country of this size can do with a few more IITs and IIMs and AIIMSes? And if these are such sterling institutions as we make them out to be, what is the problem in finding the faculty if we can pay properly? Narayana Murthy’s default mode seems to be one of confrontation. He needs to get out of this quickly if he doesn’t want to be labelled a joker with a barely concealed contempt for the political class and democratic processes.
I agree with Aatmasakshi totally. We need to be providing support to economically backward people rather than base this on caste.
On one hand our politicians say “Caste System is bad.. blah blah”.. on the other hand they are playing to the vote banks and pushing for reservation based on caste.
The only thing I disagree with “Aatma…” is the view on NRN. I am glad to see him take on his position. I dont think politicians are thinking of democratic processes. Its time that someone gave the government a “politically incorrect” reply. At least he has the guts to do that… beleive me I am not in agreement with everything NRN does..
It is sad to see how the quota issue has been put on the national agenda by our political leaders when the country is facing so many other more pressing problems. Now that it has been put on the national agenda, we should take time to study all the issues that have been raised by different experts, thought leaders, social activists, politicians, students and other concerned citizens.
Pitrorda was right in suggesting that quota should not be the criterion for selecting students for institutions of higher education. But his suggested strategy of increasing the number of IITs is not feasible. Already the existing IITs are facing the problem of recruiting qualified faculty to replace those who are retiring. They also have the usual old problem of finding financial resources. How are we then going to start 70 more IITs? Thus Pitroda’s strategy is a non-starter.
Narayanamurthy is correct in suggesting that quota should not be the deciding factor for selection of students for higher education institutions. This will not help those students who get admitted under quota. Of course those who failed to get admission as a result of the quota despite being “merited” students are losers. One of the significant reasons for IITs being institutions of excellence is the fact that they are able to attract the best and the brightest. Another factor of equal importance is their ability is to attract outstanding faculty. If the quality of students suffer as a result of admitting as much as 50% (likely to be more in the future years as we have seen in Tamilnadu) under quota system, the general standard of students will come down and also the quality of faculty. Then those institutions slowly will be no different than most of the educational institutions we have in the country today.
If we study the history of IITs, we can get the above mentioned insight. In the beginning when IITs were started, they were able to get some outstanding faculties. The salary structure IITs were offering was above average. There were not many opportunities for them to get employment in India. Seeking employment abroad was not that popular or avenues to get employment were not known as we do today. Since IITs were not that well known, the competition to get into IITs was not as fierce as today. After few years as IITs became well known and competition became fierce, they attracted outstanding students.
This period with hindsight may be considered as golden age of IITs. They had three factors in their favour; outstanding students, excellent faculty which had joined in the beginning and required amount of budget. But in recent years, IITs have started to lose two of the three factors favouring them. Faculties who joined IITs in the beginning are retiring and they are finding it difficult to replace them. Second the government has correctly decided to reduce funding to IITs by diverting funds to primary and secondary education. Thus the only favourable factor for IITs today is its ability to attract good students. If that is diluted under the pressure of quota system, IITs are likely to lose their shine. Do we see the beginning of the end for IITs as has happened for some outstanding educational institutions in Mysore like Maharaja’s and Maharani’s colleges?
Another question that is often asked during this debate is why we did not question the problem of merit for capitation fee based colleges especially medical colleges. I think many have forgotten that was the main reason for questioning the rationale for opening the capitation fee based colleges. As a result those colleges which gave majority of the seats based purely on capitation based fees, failed to flourish. They just did not succeed in getting good students. In fact many of them would be closed if the government liberalizes the higher education under the free market system. They neither attracted good faculty nor good students. None of them could do any research. Do we want our IITs to be like those failed capitation fee based colleges? Here again we learn from an outstanding capitation fee based college like KMC.
In recent years with increasing frequency the question of assessing “merit” is being asked. It is true that just scoring high marks by attending four or six years of coaching classes cannot be considered as merit. We need to develop a better system of assessing the merit even if it is less objective. However just because we do not have a foolproof system (perhaps we may never have one), we should not commit another blunder of selecting students on their accident of being born into some caste either backward or forward.
Since KMC was the first capitation fee based college in the country, it was able to attract the good faculty to start with. No doubt in the beginning the only criterion for admission was the ability of the parents to pay huge fees. However as years went by and KMC was able to establish its reputation, it was able to attract good students. Today most of the students joining KMC have “merit” as well as ability to pay huge fees. No doubt there may still be some admission based purely on fees (especially in the case of NRIs), but it is not the majority. Now KMC is also in trouble because it is not able to attract good faculty because of intense pressure for good teachers.
Another relevant issue discussed during the quota debate is the need to solve the social problem of helping SCs, STs and OBCs. No society can prosper if it does not solve these types of social problems. In the US, where blacks and Hispanics are in the minority, they needed affirmative action programs to help students from those communities. However because of the constitutional constraints, they have not been able to take recourse to quota system. Still they are handling the problem with some sensitivity and have zeroed in this problem by improving primary and secondary schools.
It is a well known fact that our government primary and secondary school system which is educating the children of SCs, STs and OBCs have collapsed. 40% of the children attending these schools are unable to read and write even after being there for 2 to 7 years. 80 to 90% of the students joining these schools are unable to complete the high school education and only a miniscule is able to go to colleges. It is a small wonder this gigantic problem is not on the agenda of any of the political parties. Even after 59 years of Independence, we have not been able give primary education and simple learning skills to these strata of society and now we are keen to admit them to higher education. How can we construct super structure without any foundation?
Finally who are the real beneficiaries of the quota system? As pointed out earlier, not many poor SCs, STs, and OBCs are unable to complete even 8th grade today. It is only the children of the creamy section of SCs, STs and OBCs who are able to complete colleges. They are also the ones who should be able to compete on equal footing with students from the so called forward class. In what way can this be considered as correcting the age old problem of discrimination based on caste? This is just nothing but a cheap trick played by unimaginative, selfish and unconcerned political class to create vote bank and help themselves.
Quota is a NON issue. because all that the so called Upper caste do is get free education on Merit and then jump to Overseas and serve other country . avargaLu deshakke maadodhu astralle idhe.
Lets say someother country like Australia or US which has a shortage of Doc’s gives an Open Invitation ” Since you have reservation crisis you are welcome in our country” …All those strking Docs will rush first to get their Visas .
JanagaLu haage …Politicians kooda haage …Yella Hypocrites
should we say that people coming under the caste quotas but who are/whose parents are paying income tax/ above a certain income level are not eligible ???
The quota system has existed for decades but has never been comprehensively evaluated. How successful is it? — How much of the increase in various development indices of certain communities should be attributed to quotas? Measuring this might let Arjun’s cat out of his pathetic jhola: Quotas don’t work. There’s evidence that affirmative action works, but none that quotas do (I’d like to hear about any study that might educate me otherwise).
Arguing for more, or extended, quotas without evaluating the success of existing ones is bad economics and even worse politics. Arjun and his co-losers will pay a heavy price when historians document their deeds. In the short term, unfortunately, our country will lose — in the form of many competitive advantages.
Personally, I don’t see a need for quotas in higher/professional ed if goals of student recruitment/retention and instructional quality are met in elementary school. Arjun seems to be covering up for the vast failures of successive governments in elementary/universal education.
Most of those governments have been run by the Congress: Especially shameful that a senior Congress leader should call for quotas nearly 60 years after Independence, for more than 50 of which the Congress has been in power. But who’s to question Arjun — he doesn’t have a chance in hell to be PM, can’t be fired easily because of his record of party loyalty, so why not create trouble for Manmohan even if he has to lean on his walking stick to do so.
I read an excellent post on this link.- dcubed.blogspot.com/2005/ 12/distance-to-drinking-water.html. I am reproducing some of it.
As per the Mandal commission, the definition of OBC was done using 11 criteria. Each was assigned a certain number of points. Here are those criteria.
Note the use of the word classes in addition to caste.
A) Social factors (3 points each, total 12)
1) Castes/Classes considered as socially backward by others.
2) Castes/Classes which mainly depend on manual labour for their livelihood.
3) Castes/Classes where at least 25 per cent females and 10 per cent males above the state average get married at an age below 17 years in rural areas and at least 10 per cent females and 5 per cent males do so in urban areas.
4) Castes/Classes where participation of females in work is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
B) Educational factors (2 points each, total 6)
5) Castes/Classes where the number of children in the age-group of 5-15 years who never attended school is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
6) Castes/Classes where the rate of student dropout in the age-group of 5-15 years is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
7) Castes/Classes amongst whom the proportion of matriculates is at least 25 per cent below the state average.
C) Economic factors (1 point each, total 4)
8) Castes/Classes where the average value of family assets is at least 25 per cent below the state average.
9) Castes/Classes where the number of families living in kuccha houses is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
10) Castes/Classes where the source of drinking water is beyond half a km for more than 50 per cent of the households.
11) Castes/Classes where the number of households having taken consumption loans is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
As you see, the maximum any given community can score is 22 points. Those that scored 11 or more were, by and large, considered OBC and thus eligible for reservations.
But as you can also see, caste itself (factor #1) is given just three points. Other criteria include such considerations as the distance to drinking water, child marriages and dropout rates. By no means can these be called “casteist”, and portraying them that way is absurd.
Based on the above, even the so called forward castes can come under this category. Also an OBC in one state need not be an OBC in another. IF reservation has to be done, it is important that it is done in the right spirit and not just to score electoral points.
I
In the nineties, I have seen some forward community people get false certificates to show that they belong to the backward community in order to get seats for professional courses. Whether it is ethical or not, people have gone to that extent because they ‘badly’ wanted seats. If the quota is increased, many people may start these unethical practises and India will be the only country where forward community fights to become backward community.
Also, why should people think that they are smart only if they gain entry into professional courses. That way, I would say the whole education system needs revamping. Even government colleges should have competitive teachers. Otherwise, invariably people belonging to the ‘quota’ end up as lecturers in govt. colleges and the quality of education will never improve.
Quota system in premier institutions like IIT and IIMs is very bad, since they are the Indian brand names due to their quality and excellence. It is insult to the SC/ST and OBCs also, because it implies they are not capable of getting into these institutions without the concessions of reservation. Over the years both SC/ST and OBCs are competiting with anyone in the country in all fields including IITs and IIMs.
SC/ST and OBCs should oppose the appeasement attitude of politicians who are out to lure the people by dividing them as Scheduled and backwards. It is worst and condemnable.
How long can SC/ST and OBC people feel inferior to the upper castes despite equal rights and opportunities given to them over the years.
This controversy is an insult to them.
HINDUISM IS GOONDAISM
Now let us see what is history of meritorious Hinduism.
Prior to Buddha and Mahavira, in vedic times our Aryan upper caste ppl used to conduct yagya which involved lighting a fire & doing stuti (praise) of various gods like agni.
Afterwards they used to do sacrifice ( give BALI) of animals such as horse, goat and COW .
The meat of sacrificed animals was distributed as prasad.
In other words cow slaughter was considered good & auspicious by so called upper caste meritorious , educated, aryan religious people.
In some yagya MANAV BALI was also practiced . Dont know what they did with the meat. This practice exists even today in tantric witchcraft clandestinely.
So we can say that , that time was like African tribal system of cannibalism practiced by our so called forward upper caste Aryans.
Buddha & Mahavira strongly objected to BALI and professed non violence to all life forms.
In fact , for the very first time Buddha said —
Stop cow slaughter
Cow give us milk , butter and ghee
Cow is a very gentle animal
Cow is like a mother , Gau Mata
Buddha influenced kings of those times to completely eradicate cow slaughter. Buddha is the first Gau rakshak.
Buddha was considered as a guru of all gods and brahma at that time.
His teaching are known as Dharma Sutra (tipitak) which were very much detailed on what is right & wrong & how to meditate & attain moksha.
Buddha never hated low caste. He said he wanted progress of all castes.
His chief deciples were brahmin, kshatria, vaishya & ALSO SHUDRA.
Many shudras became arihant ( the highest title)
Chandragupta Maurya & his gradson king Ashoka were from shudra (surprising)
So India was ruled by shudras in buddhist period.
Alexander from Greece (europe) invaded india & defeated upper caste king Porus in north west.
IT WAS CHANDRAGUPTA MAURYA A SHUDRA KING WHO DEFEATED ALEXANDER FROM EUROPE.
Chandragupta Maurya fought Alexander and made him & his army to leave india who died in Iran from a wound he received in india.
So shudras were capable of defeating europians.
His grandson Ashoka (also shudra) expanded the indian empire from Afghanistan to Burma. India never was so large in areal extent in the entire history till date. Also at that time india was the richest ( thats why Alexander came). Indians were trading all over the world.
We can say that India was like present day america at that time of shudra rulers. Ashoka was instrumental in spread of Buddhism to far eastern countries.
FAR EAST COUNTRIES ADOPTED BUDDHISM , TODAY THEY ARE RICH, ADVANCED AND PROGRESSIVE.
Look in & around your house. Observe how many things are from Japan, Korea, China, Thailand , Taiwan Buddhist countries. These are gifts from Buddha. That way even Delhi metro is a gift from Buddha as it is aided by Japan & built by Korean expertise.
All this progress happened because Buddha & Mahavira injected a new moral sense into indian social system which opposed the age old brahmins system of considering brahmin as a god for the purpose of making him rich in the process. We can say that india was shining in golden age of Buddhism.
Of course the Aryan upper caste were worried for the fear of being marginalized like today.
And they conspired. After 500 years of buddha, Patanjali(a brahmin) became Maha purohit (chief priest) of King Pushya mitra shung(a Brahmin king). Patanjali (father of hindu yoga) plagiarized / stole the intellectual knowledge of buddhism and created his own Patanjal Yog Sutra. It is 75% buddhist.
Pushya mitra shung was commander in chief of last Mauryan king Brhadrata. Pushya mitra Shung(Brahmin) killed Brhadrata while he was inspecting guard of honor & took over the throne (185 BC). Pushya mitra Shung(Brahmin) hated Buddhists so much that he slaughtered them en masse. He set a prize of 100 gold coins on every dead Buddhist monk’s head. He destroyed 84000 buddhist stupas built by Ashoka. This is the true spirit of Brahmins. They are given important positions thru merit. Later on they act like devils. Beware.
After that many other hindu texts were written promoting superstition. After that the hindu kings started ignoring buddhism. Brahmins on one side and buddhist/ Jains on other side were opposed to each other intellectually.
Brahmins got the chiefs of buddhists & jains killed later on. That was the time Adi Shankara existed. There was so much massacre of Buddhists & Jains that their bodies were taken away in many carts. Buddhists & Jains practiced ahinsa (non violence) , so they were eliminated.
Brahmins collected all the manuscripts and teachings of buddhists & jains and it was burnt in fire.
While hindus today consider muslim rule of moguls as barbaric, bloody & oppressive , they ignore the fact about what they did to Buddhists & Jains.
Original Buddhist teachings were completely eliminated from india and it is simply not available anywhere even today. Later on Jains adopted a trick , they took hindu literature , eliminated hindu teachings and inserted Jain teachings and called it Jain literature. Due to this trick hindus accepted Jainism as part of Hinduism as it exits today.
Between 0 AD to 500 AD most of the hindu literature like sankhya, upanishad, vedanta was written. It is suspected that these were nothing but condensed teachings of buddha which conspiring brahmins changed it to suite their purpose. And since Buddhist knowledge was eliminated , common man had no choice to compare it. They even adopted Buddhist practices such as vegetarianism, respecting cow as mother, shaving the head etc. because these were accepted already by masses.
Another brahmin , Vatsayana wrote Kama Sutra praising sex which is in opposition to Buddha. According to Buddha brahmacharya (celibacy/ control on sexual behavior) was the very first step towards good morality and a door to higher learning. Kama sutra is one of the most popular book at the global scale, today.
UPPER CASTE ARYAN HINDU KINGS WERE FIGHTING AMONG THEMSELVES THAT IS WHAT MADE INDIA WEAK( DIVIDED WE FALL).
The result of upper caste aryan rule after buddhism was worship of brahmins and idols, unlimited superstitions and spread of fear of mantra, tantra by brahmins, untouchability, sati, making widows life miserable, in benaras poor widows were even used as as prostitutes.
What is the proof— Go to Khajuraho temple in MP. Go to Konark sun temple in orissa near puri. The xxx postures of idols in temple represent deterioration of hindu morality. Aaj Tak TV channel showed shameful sexual acts of pandas in swaminarayan temple.
Brahmins were exempted from any sin. In other words Brahmin cannot sin, so even if he rapes or kills or does anything he commits no sin. The present day statistics will tell you that worst criminals are from upper caste.
THIS IS THE MEANING OF DARK AGE – HINDU RULE — by Upper Caste
The hindu dark age made Indians morally, intellectually weak since it was based on andh vishwas, idol worship & upper caste Aryans were busy reaping a windfall of wealth by exploiting working class. The temples were full of gold – it was the poor mans sweat & blood. At the same times a new religion islam spread. Its powerful invaders pounced upon morally weak Indians. When Mohammed bin Kasim attacked sindh, its Brahmin king was busy in a tantric yagya to kill the enemy. The yagya did nothing & the king lost his head & his kingdom. The same superstitious attitude prevailed all over India who believed that tantra mantra can do everything. Slowly islam spread. Many low caste & backward people adopted it as it offered equal social status. So one of the reason of conversion was tyranny of upper caste Hinduism. Even Kashmir problem was created in this period , its king was a Buddhist who wanted to convert to Hinduism. But the kashmiri pundits objected , the king became angry & he converted to Islam and made his kashmiri people to convert too.
Later on British came. There was mutiny of 1857 which failed because many rulers like Scindhias (Brahmins) of Gwalior helped british. Jhansi ki Rani Laxmibai fought british. She left Jhansi on horseback with her adopted infant son tied to her back. Schindias of gwalior deceived her. They closed the gates of their fort. Laxmibai fought bravely but was cut down to pieces finally being left alone. Today same schindias descendents are enjoying power. Why? They are meritorious upper caste hindu Brahmins. It is said that hindu mahasabha was favoring british. The same has converted to Jansangh & its other hindu offshoots(VHP RSS BJP). Their aim is to see that upper caste Aryan hindus (preferably Brahmin) always remain in power along with the control on country’s wealth & resources.
Killings of indo-pak partition were due to rigidity & unsociability practiced by upper caste Aryans on muslims & low caste people. Conversion happened due to this only, as it is stated earlier. Another Brahmin , Nehru messed up so much that Kashmir was torn into three pieces like a cat is caught between teeth of many dogs. Kashmir problem is a creation of upper caste, meritorious, educated , aryan , religious HINDUS. Gandhi was truly righteous but he made one mistake. He made a Brahmin (Nehru) a PM instead of Jinnah because Nehru was adamant. And who was Nehru , a son of a very rich man whose garments used to be washed in Paris. A person who used to go to Europe for holidaying. If Jinnah had become PM ,at least India would have remained united. Therefore bloodshed in time of partition is a creation of selfish upper caste, meritorious, educated , aryan , religious HINDUS. Nehru simply started a dynastic rule. Nehru was opposed to reservations & Ambedkar. He even said – “We have ensured that Brahmin should rule this country forever”. He & his daughter Indira distributed FREE land to Brahmins for public schools which are meant for education of elite upper caste today.
In Indo Pak war of 1971 the defense minister was babu Jagjivan Ram, a dalit. And the army mostly (88%) comprises of SC/ST/OBC & muslims. Is it not an achievement by low castes.
Policies of Indira Gandhi could have created another partition in 84. She made Brahmins & Upper castes mostly as chief ministers such as Kamla pati Tripathi. There was very little industrial progress in her time. Indira Gandhi(Brahmin) & later her son Rajiv started borrowing huge international aid for funding govt. schemes. By earlier 90’s , the economy became very poor & on the verge of collapse due to the meritorious , upper caste , Brahmins rule. India was on the verge of debt trap( i.e. borrowing for the sake of paying). It was Dr.Manmohan Singh ( a non Brahmin ) who created an about turn in economy which is an tremendous achievement of a non hindu.
BJP won on the issue of nationalism. It’s a pro hindu party. They sowed the seeds of another partition & hindu muslim separation by demolishing Babri mosque. Their govt in Gujrat killed 2000 – 3000 people on false pretext. Their skeletons are still being found. BJP started selling assets of country in the name of sick companies divestment. Instead they hurriedly sold off best & highly profitable companies such as VSNL at low price. These companies will be eventually be bought by multinationals. This is meritorious , upper caste hindu rule.
DALIT COUNTRY’S PROGRESS?
Pakistan is a consequence of this rigid hindu exploitative attitude only. Considering that earlier only SC/ST/OBC people became muslims , Pakistan maybe considered as a country of converted dalits & backwards.They have 6% reservation for scheduled caste. Today Pakistan is progressive. There may be issues of disagreements between India & Pak , but their origins lie in vote bank politics/ power on both sides. The politicians today are very keen on developing good understanding between two because peace means progress. Today Pakis have satellite launching capability, nuclear arms , what not. Are not these dalit achievements ? Whereas in India we have people who eat rats for survival in bihar. Because thousands of crores of money released by govt. for welfare of SC/ST etc. ends up in wrong hands thru corruption by upper caste hindu politicians & bureaucrats for the purpose of filling pockets of parties & also theirs. And may be going out to swiss a/c for funding elections. How it happens is very organized, schemes are created, run and completed on paper only. False receipts are generated. Ask the govt & they will show statistics having details of grand achievements in welfare. Earlier PM Rajiv Gandhi himself admitted that only 10% money reaches the needy & poor. And the poor remains poor. The ruling upper class has maintained a vulture like attitude as always. If there is a disaster (earthquake, displacement by big dams, typhoons, tsunami , disease, poison gas tragedy etc.) , the upper caste politicians & bureaucrats become very happy & get themselves involved in it. Why? the aid will be cornered to fill their pockets thru corruption / false receipts. The most visible sign of such corruption is very poor condition of roads in the interiors of India considering that huge funds are available to state govts. So much that they are not even able to spend them. Some people say that SC/ST people are also in power & bureaucracy. But they don’t know that such people are always given unimportant positions, ignored & kept in postings of trivial matters.
REPRESSION OF LOW CASTES GOES ON
In rural areas couples are killed by village authorities (panchayats) just for love & marriage between low & high caste.
In Haryana 5 dalits were killed just because they were transporting naturally died cows 5 years back.
The low caste people attending colleges are deliberately given low grades/marks by including their failure grades in averaging since their identities are known.. Example : a student gets A grade in 3rd attempt so gets fail(0) fail(0) A grade(100) => (0 0 100)/3 = 33% marks only while possessing A grade knowledge (IITs etc). Similarly in PG entrance in AIIMS , upper caste students get admission with low marks compared to low caste students due to monopoly & politics. Low castes are hardly given entrance to MD, only diploma is given. Gold medals in nearly all the medical colleges are politically influenced & given by college management to politically linked students.
MERIT OF UPPER CASTE
R.K.Sharma (Brahmin) IG , haryana(police chief) killed Shivani bhatnager by his own hands by telephone wire, & is in jail.
R.Sharma(Brahmin) police chief(Maharastra) shifted old printing blocks as scrap & ink also to print fake currency & stamp papers as good as original. Total worth more than 3000 CRORE.
One Brahmin Police IG, Orissa , sexually abused a poor tribal girl & shown on TV also using hidden camera in 2005.
One Sharma , a serial killer , killed many girls & had sex with their dead bodies later ( reported on TV on 28 may 06)
Manu Sharma (grand son of Shanker dayal Sharma ) killed Jessica Lal in a pub just for a drink.
Dr. Saptarishi Dey in Calcutta sexually exploited his patients in the name of rehabilitation.25 May 06.
Amarmani tripathi ex,minister UP, conspired to kill Madhumita , ex lover.
EARLIER SANSKRIT WAS A MONOPOLIZING MEDIUM
Manu smiriti was also written in the hindu dark age after Buddhism which says that if a shudra listens to even a single word of Vedas , molten lead should be poured into his ears. In other words education was made a monopoly of aryan upper caste which exists even today in the form of public schools. In those times Sanskrit was used as a medium to monopolize education because it was a difficult language. Its interpretation was given only by Brahmins so whatever they said u have to believe it. For example every translation of Gita in Hindi is different.
TODAY ENGLISH IS THE MONOPOLIZING MEDIUM
Today English is used for monopolizing education. All higher education is in English. Most low caste & backward people study in government school which teach in hindi/local language in the name of matra bhasha (Mother tongue). In UP even BSc is taught in hindi. When such students take exams of engineering , medical , IIM etc. they r always at the bottom. Mother tongue should be respected & taught at small scale. But not in this manner of making poor SC/ST/OBC people intellectually handicap. The public schools (actually private) interview the students and their parents. Parents have to fill a form which requires them to reveal their economic & social status, links with politicians & bureaucrats. In other words schools want to know their caste for the purpose of filtering them out. This is Upper Caste Aryan Hindu Apartheid rule even today in the form of so called merit. We deplore it. This is Goondaism.
The Ashok Chakra in Indian flag is Buddhist sign it represents a great meritorious rule by a shudra king Ashoka which established after defeating europians (Alexander) which spanned from Afghanistan to Burma.
YES LOW CASTE WERE TRULY MERITORIUS WE ARE PROUD OF IT.
Come out from the darkness of Hindu exploitation who will dump u when u r in need.
NAMO BUDDHAYE
Buddham Sharnam Gacchami
Dhammam Sharnam Gacchami
Sangham Sharnam Gacchami
Extracts from the Manusmriti
The great sages approached Manu, who was seated with a collected mind, and, having duly worshipped him, spoke as follows:
Divine one, to declare to us precisely and in due order the sacred laws of each of the [four] castes [varnas] and of the intermediate ones.
For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds he [Brahma] caused the Brahmin, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya and the Shudra to proceed forth from his mouth, his arms, his thighs and his feet. But in order to protect this universe, He, the most resplendent one[Brahma], assigned separate [duties and] occupations to those who sprang from his mouth, arms, thighs and feet.
To Brahmins he assigned teaching and studying [the Veda], sacrificing for their own benefit and for others, giving and accepting [of alms].
The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study [the Veda], and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures.
The Vaisya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study [the Veda], to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate land.
One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Shudra, to serve meekly even these [other] three castes.
The Brahmin, Kshatriya and the Vaishya castes are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Shudra, has one birth only.
On account of his preeminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of restrictive rules and on account of his particular sanctification, the Brahmin is the lord of [all] castes.
Let the three twice-born castes, discharging their [prescribed] duties, study [the Veda], but among them the Brahmin [alone] shall teach it, not the other two; that is an established rule.
As the Brahmin sprang from [Brahman’s] mouth, as he was the first-born, and as he possesses the Veda, he is by right the lord of this whole creation. A Brahmin, coming into existence, is born the highest on earth, the lord of all created beings, for the protection of the treasury of the law. Whatever exists in the world is the property of the Brahmin. On account of the excellence of his origin the Brahmin is, indeed, entitled to all.
Whatever law has been ordained for any [person] by Manu, that has been fully declared in the Veda, for that [sage was] omniscient.
Knowledge is the austerity of the Brahmin, protecting is the austerity of the Kshatriya, his daily business is the austerity of the Vaisya, and service [of the ‘upper’ castes] the austerity of a Shudra.
Let [the first part of] a Brahmin’s name [denote something] auspicious, a Kshatriya’s be connected with power, and a Vaisya’s with wealth, but a Shudra’s [express something] contemptible. [The second part of] a Brahmin’s [name] shall be [a word] implying happiness, of a Kshatriya’s [a word] implying protection, of a Vaisya’s [a term] expressive of thriving, and of a Shudra’s [an expression] denoting service.
Kshatriyas prosper not without Brahmins [and] Brahmins prosper not without Kshatriyas. Brahmins and Kshatriyas, being closely united, prosper in this [world] and in the next. But to serve Brahmins [who are] learned in the Vedas, householders and famous [for virtue] is the highest duty of a Shudra, which leads to beatitude. [A Shudra who is] pure, the servant of his betters, gentle in speech and free from pride and always seeks refuge with Brahmins, attains [in his next life] a higher caste.
The whole world is kept in order by punishment . [So] let him [the king] act with justice in his own domains, chastise his enemies, behave without duplicity towards his friends, and be lenient towards the Brahmins. The king has been created [to be] the protector of the castes and orders, who, all according to their rank, discharge their several duties. Let the king, after rising early in the morning, worship the Brahmins who are well-versed in the three-fold sacred science and learned and follow their advice . Though dying [with want] a king must not levy a tax on Srotriyas (priests) and no Srotriya residing in his kingdom must perish from hunger.
A king, desirous of investigating law cases, must enter his court of justice, preserving a dignified demeanor, together with Brahmins and with experienced councilors . A Brahmin who subsists only by the name of his caste or one who merely calls himself a Brahmin may, at the king’s pleasure, interpret the law to him, but never a Shudra. The kingdom of that monarch who looks on while a Shudra settles the law will sink [low] like a cow in a morass. That kingdom where Shudras are very numerous, which is infested by atheists and destitute of twice-born (’upper’ caste) [inhabitants], soon entirely perishes, afflicted by famine and disease.
[The king] should carefully compel Vaisyas and Shudras to perform the work [prescribed] for them; for if these two [castes] swerved from their duties, they would throw this [whole] world into confusion.
A Kshatriya, having defamed a Brahmin, shall be fined one hundred [panas]; a Vaisya one hundred and fifty or two hundred; a Shudra shall suffer corporal punishment.
A once-born man (Shudra) who insults a twice-born (’upper’ caste) man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out, for he is of low origin. If he mentions the names and castes of the [’twice-born’] with contempt, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. If he [a Shudra] arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears.
A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of high caste shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or [the king] shall cause his buttock to be gashed. (Any form of punishment for this ‘crime’).
If out of arrogance he [a Shudra] spits [on a superior] the king shall cause both his lips to be cut off.
If he [a Shudra] lays hold of the hair [of a superior] let the [king] unhesitatingly cut off his hands.
He who strikes [a Brahmin] even with a blade of grass . shall appease him by a prostration. But he who, intending to hurt a Brahmin, threatens [him with a stick and the like] shall remain in hell for a hundred years; he who [actually] strikes him [shall remain in hell] for a thousand years.
A Chandala (the ‘lowest’ caste), a village pig, a cock, a dog, a menstruating women and a eunuch must not look at the Brahmins when they eat.
Let him [a Brahmin] not dwell in a country where the rulers are Shudras . nor in one swarming with men of the lowest caste . Let him not give advice to a Shudra . for he who explains the sacred law [to a Shudra] or dictates him to a penance will sink together with that [man] into the hell [called] Asamvrita. Let him not recite [the Vedas] indistinctly, nor in the presence of Shudras .
When he [a Brahmin] has touched a Chandala, a menstruating woman, an outcast, a woman in childbed, a corpse or one who has touched [a corpse], he becomes pure by bathing . Let him not allow a dead Brahmin to be carried out by a Shudra while men of the same caste are at hand, for that burnt offering which is defiled by a Shudra’s touch is detrimental to [the deceased’s passage to] heaven.
A Brahmin who unintentionally approaches a woman of the Chandala or of [any other] very low caste, who eats [the food of such persons] and accepts [gifts from them] becomes an outcast, but [if he does it] intentionally he becomes their equal.
The dwellings of Chandalas and Svapakas [people of very ‘low’ caste] shall be outside the village and their wealth [shall be] dogs and donkeys. Their dress [shall be] the garments of the dead, [they shall eat] their food from broken dishes, black iron [shall be] their ornaments, and they must always wander from place to place . At night they shall not walk about in villages and in towns. By day they may go about for the purpose of their work, distinguished by marks at the king’s command, and they shall carry out the corpses [of persons] who have no relatives-that is a settled rule.
A man of low caste, who, through covetousness, lives by the occupations of a higher one, the king shall deprive of his property and banish. It is better to [discharge] one’s own [appointed caste] duty incompletely than to perform completely that of another; for he who lives according to the law of another [caste] is instantly excluded from his own . Let a [Shudra] serve Brahmins, either for the sake of heaven or with a view to both [this life and the next], for he who is called the servant of a Brahmin thereby gains all his ends. The service of Brahmins alone is declared [to be] an excellent occupation for a Shudra, for whatever else besides this he may perform will bear him no fruit.
No collection of wealth must be made a Shudra, even though he be able [to do it], for a Shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmins.
He who has associated with outcasts, he who has approached the wives of other men and he who has stolen the property of a Brahmin becomes [after death] a brahmarakshas [fierce devil].
It is declared that a Shudra woman alone [can be] the wife of a Shudra, she and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Vaishya, those two and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Kshatriya, those three and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Brahmin . Twice-born (’upper’ caste) men, who, in their folly, wed wives of the low [Shudra] caste soon degrade their families and their children to the state of Shudras. According to Atri and to [Gautama] the son of Uthaya, he who weds a Shudra woman becomes an outcast . A Brahmin who takes a Shudra wife to his bed will [after death] sink into hell; if he begets a child by her he will lose the rank of a Brahmin.
A [man of ] low [caste] who makes love to a maiden [of] the highest [caste] shall suffer corporal punishment.
The property of a Brahmin must never be taken by the king, that is a settled rule; but [the property of men] of other castes the king may take on failure of all [heirs].
Let the king corporally punish all those [persons] who either gamble and bet or afford [an opportunity for it], likewise Shudras who assume the distinctive marks of twice-born [men].
Never slay a Brahmin, though he [may] have committed all [possible] crimes . No greater crime is known on earth than slaying a Brahmin. A king, therefore, must not even conceive in his mind the thought of killing a Brahmin.
A Brahmin, be he ignorant or learned, is a great divinity, just as the fire, whether carried forth [for the performance of a sacrifice] or not carried forth, is a great divinity. Thus, though Brahmins employ themselves in all [sorts of] mean occupations they must be honoured in every way, for [each of] them is a very great deity.
[The king] should order a Vaisya to trade, to lend money, to cultivate the land or to tend cattle, and a Shudra to serve the twice-born castes . A Brahmin who, because he is powerful, out of greed makes initiated [men of the] twice-born [castes] against their will to do the work of slaves, shall be fined by the king six hundred [panas]. But a Shudra, whether bought or not bought, he may compel to do servile work, for he was created by the Self-Existent (swayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmin. A Shudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude; since that is innate in him, who can set him free?
A Brahmin may confidently seize the goods of [his] Shudra [slave], for, as that [slave] can have no property, his master may take his possessions . That sinful man, who, through covetousness, seizes the property of the gods or the property of Brahmins feeds in another world on the leavings of vultures. The Brahmin is declared [to be] the creator [of the world], the punisher, the teacher [and hence] a benefactor [of all created beings], to him let no man say anything unpropitious nor use any harsh worlds.