Recent Discussions

Rationale behind Hindu Customs and Beliefs

4th May 1999      Sudheer Birodkar @yahoo.com

Dear Reader,

Have you ever looked upon the present as a result of history? Sounds like a 
very banal and commonplace statement, does it? Yes but we are a result of 
our past, a result of the lives and ideas of our ancestors. Here we try to 
study of Indian History by 'standing on its head' the conventional approach 
to the study of history which begins with the dim past and comes to the 
present as a conclusion.

Our approach starts with social institutions and practices of the present 
age and traces their origin and development to the historic past. With this 
approach you will not feel lost on the opening page of a history book. You 
are not confronted with a society in which lived your ancestors two or 
three thousand years ago. You begin with the society surrounding you, which 
is of your immediate concern.

This method of interpreting the present and past should establish an 
intimate rapport between a citizen of today and the heritage bequeated to 
him by earlier generations. In our lifestyle, customs, traditions, beliefs; 
our history is reflected but it is normally beyond our perception. It would 
be a fascinating and enlightening experience to trace the origins of things 
we see and do today in the bygone ages. As a citizen of India can one 
answer questions like:

1) Why have Indians always attached more importance to Non-violence 
(Ahimsa) than any other people ?

2) How did vegetarianism become nearly an all pervading attitude in India 
from ancient times ?

3) How is it that the cow (Gomata) and bull (Nandi) have come to acquire an 
exalted place in our religious pantheon ?

4) How was the practice of charity (Dana) elevated to the status of a 
religious offering ?

5) Why do we propitiate the elementals, especially fire ( in Yagna ) to 
usher in prosperity ?

6) How did our insistence on performing events such as marriage, thread 
ceremony, opening ceremony, etc., at a certain auspicious time (Muhurta) 
come into being ?

7) How did the practice of observing fast (Upavasa) originate and what 
could be the motive behind fasting and other practices like walking over 
hot coals, puncturing parts of one's body or tonsuring one's head ?

8) What purpose did the ideas like Moksha and Nirvana (release from the 
cycle of re-birth) serve in Indian society and how did they come into being 
?

9) What is the forgotten meaning behind our religious symbols like Swastika 
and Omkar ?

10) What does the vermilion mark that we traditionally apply on our 
forehead (Tilaka) and our method of greeting each other with folded hands 
(Namaskara) signify ?

11) How did we come to look upon the saffron colour as sacred ? 

12) What do we know about the social origins of festivals like Navaratri, 
Diwali or Holi, that we celebrate with faith and fervour ?

13) Why had secularism, commonly understood as religious tolerance (Sarva 
dharma samabhava) normally been part of Indian polity in ancient times as 
in post-independence India ?

14) Why do we attach overwhelming importance to ideas like fate (Daiva) and 
re-birth (Punarjanma) ?

15) Why do we explain away disqualifications arising out of birth in a 
particular caste and other misfortunes with the doctrine of deeds in past 
life (Karma) ?

16) Why do we frown upon a person who marries outside his caste ? 

17) How did this endogamy (Sajatiya Vivaha) originate ? 

18) Why has occupational stratification crystallized with birth in a 
particular caste only in Indian Society ?

19) How did one section of Indian society acquire the hereditary status of 
noble born (Dvija) and another as low born (Shudra) ?

20) Why do some of us still consider the mere touch of members of some 
castes as polluting ?

21) How did our attitudes of untouchability and unapproachability originate 
?

22) Why did we follow, till recently, practices like dowry (Daheja), Widow 
burning (Sati) and child marriage (Bal-Vivaha) ?

23) What reason lies behind our concept of Satyuga (age of righteousness) 
which we believe existed in some time past and will return at the end of 
the existing dark age (Kaliyuga) ?

The list could be endless. The author has attempted to present facts and 
hypotheses about these various issues by beginning from the present period 
and tracing into the past, the evolution of these social attitudes which 
today continue to be a part of an average Indian's temperament.

Awareness of the origins of our social attitudes also acquires added 
importance as compared to issues of the contemporary age like inflation, 
unemployment, corruption, the global arms race, etc. This is so because, 
contemporary issues are always in focus. The majority of us are quite 
familiar with them as these issues are products of our age and the media 
keeps us well informed about-developments taking place. Added to this, 
these issues are not bound up with religion, tradition or culture and hence 
are always open to public debate.

On the contrary much is unknown to us about our attitudes that arise from 
socio-religious traditions inherited from the past. Their having originated 
in the hazy past alongwith the sanctity that is attached to most of them, 
results in our being ignorant of the real meaning behind attitudes that 
contribute significantly to the shaping of our temperament.

 Pierced stonework. It is incredible to know that such pieces were sculpted 
from stone in the middle ages in India.

ORIGIN OF THE CAT-ASTROPHE 

An anecdote would illustrate the birth of a belief from a practice that 
began in a simple utilitarian manner.

This is the story of a pious God-fearing king from ancient India. To earn 
the praise of the lords of Heaven this king annually organised mass feeding 
of Sadhus, Sanyasis (hermits) and Brahmins (priests). Countless number of 
learned Brahmins, Sadhus and Sanyasis used to converge on his palace to 
partake in the gastronomical delights and bestow their blessings on the 
generous king.

On one such occasion it so happened that when the holy assemblage was being 
served Kheer (the Indian porridge) one of the royal pet cats ran into the 
unfortunate steward who tripped and measured his length on the floor, 
spilling the bubbling stew on their holiness'.

The helpless steward was at the receiving end of their curses, but the 
enlightened king pacified them and after performing ablutions on them to 
wash off the offending stains, he decreed that henceforth before the 
commencement of the great feast all cats in the palace ground should be 
herded together and tied to a Stake, to prevent any such untoward incident 
in future.

The mass feeding continued undisturbed year after year and so did the 
practice of tying up to a stake, the feline members of the royal habitat 
who came to be looked upon as portending misfortune. With the passing of 
years the old king was no more, but his son was no less pious than him and 
so also was the grandson. Generation after generation scrupulously adhered 
to this practice of tying up the feline population followed by the grand 
feast. No feast could begin unless tying up 'ceremony' had been duly 
completed. The two practices came to be looked upon as essential for 
earning the praise of the lords of Heaven.

Then one year came a severe famine. Rivers went dry, fields were barren and 
the kingdom's people started migrating to better places. Came the day for 
the annual event but there were hardly any Brahmins left to do justice to 
the meagre rations that remained in the royal larder. After consulting his 
Chaplain the reigning king decided to temporarily suspend the second 
practice of hosting the grand luncheon. But as advised by the learned 
chaplain, the king decided to solemnly honour the first practice of tying 
up a few feline 'beasts of doom' and earn whatever praise the lords of 
heaven could bestow. But there were no cats to be found in the 
famine-struck kingdom. So the King ordered that a few cats be obtained from 
the neighbouring kingdom for the tieing-up ceremony to be duly performed on 
the auspicious day!

It was a bad time for the country and the famine continued for many 
consecutive years during which period, the Reigning king passed away and 
was succeded by his youthful son. The youthful King also scrupulously 
adhered to the practice of annually tying up all cats to earn the lord's 
praise, as he had seen his father perform it. The country finally recovered 
from the dry spell and happier days were back. With prosperity having 
returned, the old generation advisers recalled the practice of giving the 
annual feast and the king wanted to re-institute that practice after 
seeking the royal chaplain's blessings. But the royal chaplain had seen how 
his power over the king had increased in absence of other Brahmins who 
would otherwise hover around the king.

Keeping this in mind, the wily chaplain advised the king against 
re-instituting the mass feeding because, he said, the terrible famine was a 
result of divine wrath on the practice of feeding idle members of society 
which had been observed since countless generations.

The chaplain convinced the king by telling him that the country obtained 
deliverance from the divine wrath only because the Gods saw that this 
practice had been done away with for the last few years. The chaplain 
argued that it was enough to continue the annual event of tying up the 
inauspicious feline harbingers of catastrophes and earning the praise of 
the lords of heaven.

Thus convinced, the king ordained that henceforth in his kingdom all feline 
creatures were to be herded together and tied up on the day the grand feast 
used to be observed. This was to be the sacred duty of every citizen, as 
the future of the kingdom depended on the lord's blessings which could not 
be obtained if the 'holy' practice of tying up all cats was not followed. 
Non-observance of the practice was made a punishable offence. From that 
year onwards, the grand feast was forgotten but the ceremony of tying cats 
took root.

And ages later neither the king remained nor his kingdom, but this 'holy' 
ritual that defied rationale built up the belief of cats being the vehicles 
of ill omen. A belief which has withstood the test of time.

A reading of the Panchantantra, Hitopadesha, Katha-Sarit-Sagara and the 
Jatakas, our national collections of similar anecdotes would bring out many 
instances of how most of our rituals and beliefs originated from simple 
worldly actions of our forebears.

Indian history is replete with such beliefs end rituals which had a sound 
reason for coming into being but later they were continued to be observed 
despite the fact that the reason did not hold true any more. Our daily life 
also abounds with innumerable rituals the meaning of which is lost in 
history. We follow them out of reverence. But can reverence help us in 
understanding the roots of our culture, or for that do we need an attitude 
of inquiry ?

An inquisitive and fertile mind can pose incisive questions and strive for 
convincing answers. In this book; HINDU HISTORY - A Search for Our Present 
in History, a modest attempt has been made to accomplish this.

The language used in this book is a simple one, as the author hopes to 
reach to a wide readership. No specialised knowledge is called for to 
understand what is being told. And as the social attitudes and customs 
which are being discussed form part of our present-day lives, no lengthy 
introduction is necessary . All that is hoped from the reader is a 
dispassionate approach in understanding the process of evolution of 
attitudes, traditions and beliefs which have been handed down to us by our 
forebears. For this it would do well to bear in mind our sagacious adage:

Asatoma Sad Gamaya 

Tamasoma Jyotir Gamaya 

( Lead me from falsehoods to truth 

and from ignorance to enlightenment )

Structured and richly illustrated info on this subject is presented at:

http://india.coolatlanta.com/GreatPages/sudheer/book2/

Mirror sites:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/sudheer_history/
http://members.tripod.com/~sudheerb/

- Sudheer Birodkar

7th May 1999      P.K.Saha @poboxes.com

Sudheer Birodkar wrote

>1) Why have Indians always attached more importance to Non-violence
>(Ahimsa) than any other people ?

Wrong. We Hindus have been the most violent race. We have the only religion
whose sacred books, one is cent per cent war and other is more than one
seventh war. Before the British came, we had several hundred states fighting
with each other. The concept of non violence was given by M.K. Gandhi, the
first and last leader to preach and practice the same.

>2) How did vegetarianism become nearly an all pervading attitude in India
>from ancient times ?

Wrong again. Go to Bengal and animal sacrifice is ritual in Kali temples. Go
to Nepal, the only Hindu nation and see mass scale "Mahisasur Vadh/ bali" on
Dussehra day.


>15) Why do we explain away disqualifications arising out of birth in a
>particular caste and other misfortunes with the doctrine of deeds in past
>life (Karma) ?

>16) Why do we frown upon a person who marries outside his caste ?

>17) How did this endogamy (Sajatiya Vivaha) originate ?

>18) Why has occupational stratification crystallized with birth in a
>particular caste only in Indian Society ?

>19) How did one section of Indian society acquire the hereditary status of
>noble born (Dvija) and another as low born (Shudra) ?

>20) Why do some of us still consider the mere touch of members of some
>castes as polluting ?

>21) How did our attitudes of untouchability and unapproachability
originate?


According to Max Mueller, the famous German Indologist, who first translated
the Veda in to any other language, the only common feature of Hinduism
throughout the length and breadth of the sub-continent is casteism.In fact,
all other religion have borrowed it in various forms from us only.

With best wishes,
P.K.Saha

7th May 1999      D.Haldar @pobox.com

I am afraid some historical corrections will be in order.



At 12:41 AM 5/7/99 +0530, P.K.Saha wrote:
>
>Sudheer Birodkar wrote
>
>>1) Why have Indians always attached more importance to Non-violence
>>(Ahimsa) than any other people ?
>
>Wrong. We Hindus have been the most violent race. We have the only
>religion whose sacred books, one is cent per cent war and other is more
>than one seventh war. Before the British came, we had several hundred
>states fighting with each other. The concept of non violence was given by
>M.K. Gandhi, the first and last leader to preach and practice the same.

Conception of non violence did not originate from Gandhiji but more
ancient Mahatma whose name was Buddha. King Ashoka was the ardent
propagator of this and he did this in his empire (which was then almost
entire present day India plus Pakistan plus Afghanistan etc) through
inscription on his famous Asoka Pillars strewn all over the country.
Hinduism does not teach Non-Violence. Gandhiji was shrewd enough to
realise that he could not take on the mighty brits in an armed struggle
(he had before him the sporadic attempts by revolutionaries in all parts
of India which was not effective to dislodge the Brits) so he reorted to
Non-Violence, an idea whuch got immediate response from the people.
Hartals and Bandhs came of age at this time.


>
>>2) How did vegetarianism become nearly an all pervading attitude in
>>India from ancient times ?
>
>Wrong again. Go to Bengal and animal sacrifice is ritual in Kali temples.
>Go to Nepal, the only Hindu nation and see mass scale "Mahisasur Vadh/
>bali" on Dussehra day.
How did vegetarianism became all pervading in India. This was the
question. Here again we will have to go back to Buddha and King Ashok.
After the massacre of Kalinga he laid down his arms and became the greater
propagator of Buddhism (Mahendra, his son was sent to Ceylon to make the
country Buddhist and he eminently succeeded in this) and one of the things
he urged (not ordered) his countrymen is to turn Vegetarian. Please note
in Vedic Brahmanism (then name of Hinduism) an ordinary householder used
to sacrifice cattle etc to propitiate Gods and after that used to cook the
meat and eat it. You would notice that in some parts of India
vegetarianism is very strong. This is because Mahavir also influenced his
adherents, the Jains, to shun meat.




>
>
>>15) Why do we explain away disqualifications arising out of birth in a
>>particular caste and other misfortunes with the doctrine of deeds in
>>past life (Karma) ?
>
This is a philosophy propounded principally I think to keep the people
under control so that  are easily governable.

>>16) Why do we frown upon a person who marries outside his caste ?
Again after Asoka and the Gupta period India was subjected to constant
raids from Mlechhas who would not agree to become a part of the Hindu
Society. This is one of the main reasons I think you can still see Hindus
around even after 600 years of relentless onslaught from the Mlechhas.


>
>>17) How did this endogamy (Sajatiya Vivaha) originate ?
Same reason as above if you mean why Hindus should marry only Hindus. 

>
>>18) Why has occupational stratification crystallized with birth in a
>>particular caste only in Indian Society ?
>
This answer you can easily get from any reliable book on  Society in
Ancient India and the Varna system.


>>19) How did one section of Indian society acquire the hereditary status
>>of noble born (Dvija) and another as low born (Shudra) ?

Same answer as above

>
>>20) Why do some of us still consider the mere touch of members of some
>>castes as polluting ?

This is a latter day phenomenon not originating with the religious
philosophy but superstitions accumulated  over the years to isolate the
Mlechhas and then it was extended to lower castes as well. > >>21) How did
our attitudes of untouchability and unapproachability >originate? > >
>According to Max Mueller, the famous German Indologist, who first
translated >the Veda in to any other language, the only common feature of
Hinduism >throughout the length and breadth of the sub-continent is
casteism.In fact, >all other religion have borrowed it in various forms
from us only. > I am sorry Max Muller we find was much prejudiced and his
interpretations were not quite correct. But the answer of this question
you will find in my previous reply. If you are indeed very agitated about
these things I can give you more information and references on the web if
you would e-mail me.


>With best wishes,
>P.K.Saha
>
Sorry mr. saha. I have disagreed with you.

dhaldar

7th May 1999      Chirag Mehta @chime.hypermart.net

--- In Reply To ---
Subject: Rationale behind Hindu Customs and Beliefs
From: "sudheer birodkar" 

Dear Reader,

Have you ever looked upon the present as a result of history? Sounds like
a very banal and commonplace statement, does it? Yes but we are a result
of our past, a result of the lives and ideas of our ancestors. Here we try
to study of Indian History by 'standing on its head'.......

--- Reply ---

That was very informative. :-)

I am very interested to hear you answer some of those Indian Reeti-Rivaj
questions.

Thanks

Chirag Mehta

9th May 1999      neeraj chaturvedi @hotmail.com

hi all,

plssss dont misunderstand HINDU DHARMA ...Its not religion ...its
DHARMA....

Vegetrianism is one sect, non vegeterianism is anothther....A thiest and
and athiest both are different believes in hinduism (remember both are
hinduism)...same is true for violence and non violence....and same is true
materialism and spiritualism....

Its DHARMA bcos there is no one book... no one prophet ... If u have any
new experiments...any innovative ways of better life... add to it.... and
it will become part of hinduism....

If you can give one rule...which defines hinduism....I can produce
millions of people who are HINDUs but they dont follow that particular
rule....

ciu
neeraj

9th May 1999      Raj Kumar @hotmail.com

Superstitions (blindly followed traditions) exist in all ethnic groups and
around the world. Most Western nations, with scientific development, and
with progress made in social sciences, have done away with them (to a
large extent).  The level of illiteracy in India makes it worse (not just
the ability to read and write, but to think with reason).  That is why
cats are considered an ill-omen, but panthers or tigers or cheetahs are
not.

As far as the caste system - in my opinion, it's a primal, tribal instinct
that moves people to protect their own, guard against 'others', and in
many cases the more powerful trying to dominate the weaker.  I have seen
essentially the same phenomenon happening in France with immigrants from
Algiers and Morocco.  And in Germany with immigrant workers from Turkey. 
In the U.S. it has happened to the black people originally from Africa. 
And lets not forget the Aborigines in Australia.

Books explaining the origins of many of our widely held beliefs may cause
us to laugh at ourselves (a very healthy sign, I must add).  And perhaps
our attitudes will become less rigid, more humane, more tolerant and in
the best of cases, even spiritual.

9th May 1999      P.K.Saha @poboxes.com

D. Haldar  wrote

>Sorry mr. saha. I have disagreed with you.
>
>dhaldar


No need to be apologetic, my dear Mr. Haldar. The list is meant for honest
opinions and long live the sincere differences. What I basically meant was
that although Hinduism does not teach violence, we have been a violent race
as any. In fact, not many religions preach violence but then the other races
have been having religious books which do not have "Mahabharat" like World
Wars as their background.

Similarly, all religions emanating from Indian subcontinent have had a caste
system. Even Christian and Anglo Indian now demand lower caste reservations.
Sikhism is fast becoming a caste based religion with Sikhs adopting caste
indicative surnames and others seeking caste based reserved seats
everywhere. Max Mueller may have been prejudiced but was certainly more
clear than many of the leaders of today.
With best wishes,
P.K.Saha

10th May 1999      Ryan Cardoz @pcsbom.patni.com

Christians are moving into caste because the govt gives benefits and they
also being indians would definitely want a piece of the  cake too .The
moment the govt stops these benefits the cast system will vanish .

Regards,

Ryan

10th May 1999      Aditya Mishra @bc.seflin.org

I agree both with M/s saha and cardoz. Hindus claim that their religion is
more nonviolent than others because many of them are vegetarians but this
kind ahimsa is a also later development coming from Jainism and Budhism.
Casteism is practiced by middle class Indians ( not just the Hindus )
primarily at two occasions i.e. marriage and elections. It is true that it
is the politicians who keep the casteism and linguism alive because they
do not know any other way to get elected. Since the electorate cannot
distinguish them on anything else regardless  of which political party
they may belong to at the moment, we find that Sonia Gandhi a natural
attraction because she comes from a different country and culture and
therefore ostensibly above the caste and state language Mafiosi.


Have a peaceful and joyous day.
�1998	Aditya Mishra 
 homepage: http://www.smart1.net/aditya 
 ICQ Pager: 1131674
Random thought of the day:
 People often find it easier to be a result of the past than a cause of
the future.

11th May 1999      P.K.Saha @poboxes.com

>Ryan Cardoz wrote:
>
> Christians are moving into caste because the govt gives benefits and
> they also being indians would definitely want a piece of the  cake too .The
> moment the govt stops these benefits the cast system will vanish .


Christianity is a non caste based religion but it has been indianised in
India to include caste system. Even when the govt. Stops these benefits (
if it does?), the system will still find some pretext to survive. As they
say, wherever there are two Indians, there are three castes (or political
parties). Otherwise, how come even in Africa, Indians follow the caste
system. With best wishes, P.K.Saha

12th May 1999      Aseem Asthana @bom4.vsnl.net.in

Hello friends, 

I have been reading the posts on this topic and I capture what I feel
below. 

The first thing is that most of these practices are Hindu and not Indian.
When we say Indian we mean Hindus, and Mulsims, Sikhs, Christians, Jains,
Parsees and many more religions. Together we people have decided to form
together a nation with the name. But it is not right that since Hindus are
the majority their customs become national customs. Please dont read into
this any attempt to make Hindus loose their identity. 

Secondly, most of the beliefs and practices are not good. So it is a good
thing that somebody is trying to reach to their origin. Because only when
we know what gave birth to something then only we can hope to cut it out
from the soceity. I am referring to in-human practice of castesism and the
like. 

Fianally, with due respect, Mr. Haldar, do you have any reason to suspect
that Max Muller was prejudiced against India and that his observations are
not sound. I say this because it is most likely that somebody will cite
his observations and hope that the effect that he/she has created is one
of respect because the authority is a European. This happens all the time
in debates. And yet, now we are discredeting him, just because his
observations are not condusive to our line to reasoning? 

Bye,
Aseem.

21st May 1999      K.Varatharajan @igcar.ernet.in

> I have been reading the posts on this topic and I capture what I feel below. 
> 
> The first thing is that most of these practices are Hindu and not Indian.
But it is not right that since Hindus are the majority their customs
become national customs. Please dont read into this any attempt to make
Hindus loose their identity. 

> My response to the above observation is that Hinduism is not a religion
> but just philosophy of life. Only unfortunate events that are happening
> today is that there is not even a strong person to interpret the
> philosophies told in all four vedas and the fifth veda, namely "RAMAYANA
> AND MAHABHARATHA". In fact, the fifth veda is easy to learn, understand
> and practise equality based life. Partialities, biased moves and
> defending actions to protect the partialities and biased moves were
> plentily available in Ramayana and Mahabharatha to indicate to the most
> down-trodden human being in society belonging to any age. For this, I am
> citing two examples below: 

> 1. Lord Rama (so called great hero) is an opportunist. Here, kindly bear
 with me for taking some time. Rama has won the competition by bending
 Sivadhanush and Sita was to be bonded to him. All the success in getting
 Devi Sita has its almost complete contributions from the sage,
 Viswamitra was eagerly bringing holy water to do the wedding rituals,
 but was opposed by the family sage Vasishta on the grounds that
 Viswamitra is not a Brahmarishi. Dasaratha, father of Rama could not
 over-rule Vasishta.  Desparate Viswamitra looked at Rama. Rama quoted
 Viswamitra, his teacher himself:"WORDS OF FATHER ARE THE VEDAS FOR EVERY
 ONE." Quoting this statement, he did not honour Viswamitra's (his guru) 
 aspiration of conducting his marriage with Sita (Rama a great
 personality exhibiting (un)gratefulness). See the pitiable condition of
 the great scholar, Viswamitra who has really put in all efforts to make
 Rama a great scholar, academician, valourous personality and moulder of
 his future life in holding the hands of Devi Sita. Where has gone the
 rational thinking by the great Lord Rama, who simply defended himself
 under the philosophy:  "WORDS OF FATHER ARE THE VEDAS FOR EVERY ONE"
 which he used once again to get away with the responsibility of running
 the government of Ayodhya by fleeing into forests for 14 years and thus
 making government of Ayodhya as care-taker government being shifted from
 Ayodhya to Nandigramam, care-taking authority being his chappals,
 honoured by non-idealists Bharatha and Sathrugna?

> 2. This is a scene from Mahabharatha. Generally Lord Krishna is used to
  be projected as a liar, scoundral, cheater, womaniser and so on. But he
  has in many cases fought for women freedom (Coming to rescue for
  Panchali - Dhraupathi in many occasion). He also was mixing with the
  common men at very gross root levels of society - rural persons in
  Ayarpadi - bringing to the notice of all about the socialism and
  equality - projecting himself as a shephard but not as a brahmin - an
  example for fighting casteism.  Coming to the argument on economic 
  equality, his regards to his classmate - Sudhama alias Kusela and his
  treatments even after becoming the king of Mathura can be well studied
  by any one at any level. Even in Mahabharatha War, he was simply holding
  the position of cart-driver but not those positions like Chief Marshal
  etc. - practically demonstrating his non-lust for powerful positions. 


> Secondly, most of the beliefs and practices are not good. So it is a good
> thing that somebody is trying to reach to their origin. Because only when
> we know what gave birth to something then only we can hope to cut it out
> from the soceity. I am referring to in-human practice of castesism and the
> like. 

> My response to this is explained in example No.2, projecting Lord
Krishna a philosopher preaching socialism, equality and non-desire for the
one that one can not achieve, thereby fighting against casteism and the
like.
 
> And yet, now we are discredeting him (Max Muller), just because his
observations are not condusive to our line to reasoning?

> My response to this is that a real rational human being practising the
  philosophy of Hinduism (kindly remember the philosophy but not religion)
  will never discredit Max Muller who has really put in more efforts by
  coming to India and contributed more to Sanskrit and also contributed
  more to make know all the people of the world to know much more about
  Hinduism.

> So, dear Mr. Aseem,
  Kindly forget about the so-practised customs but work more forward to
  understand the philosophy of creating a tranquilised society with
  eternal happiness and peacefulness. Enjoy the help I have rendered to
  you and I shall definitely enjoy the help you have rendered to me. 

  Regards.

K.Varatharajan