Discuss the "Caste System" in relation to modern Hinduism.

This weeks discussion question in my World Religions class:

Discuss the "Caste System" in relation to modern Hinduism.  Does it have a place in modern society?  If so, explain.  Can people be expected to maintain their "place" or is it outdated and to be discarded?

I have to admit, I am somewhat stymied this week, in reading the chapter and then visiting various websites to learn more.  What I learned is that there is so much to learn before one could ever begin to understand a system as complex as that of this incredibly ancient civilization.  The Caste System is an integral part of the system that has lasted for centuries.  This way of life, living, and interacting that is a part of the very fabric of Hinduism is not something that an outsider should judge or consider lightly. 

Many noted experts disagree as to definition of the Caste System, right down to the very translation of the words.  Swami Chidanand Saraswatiji of the India Heritage Research Foundation contends the word “Varna” ,found in the scriptures, means “class” not “caste”.   He also states  that when the Portuguese colonized parts of India, they mistakenly translated “varna vyavasthaa” as “caste system” and the mistake stuck.*

Regardless to the semantics and translations of the words, I guess what it all boils down to is treatment of each other.  Their system of “class” or “caste”, which ever word you might choose, is indisputably part of the very heart of Hinduism.   If you are of the opinion like Dr. Subramanium Swamy, author of the book, Hinduism under Siege, the caste system is a good thing based on its original intention.  He explained that the caste system was not designed as antagonistic groupings, nor was it connected to birth.  According to him, the caste system was created to keep the balance of the four powers in society-knowledge, wealth, weapons and land- from falling into one group’s hands. *

Swami Chidanand Saraswatji  points out that there is no hierarchy at all inherent in the varna system and that all parts are of equal importance and worth.  He compares it to the body saying the brain is no more important than the legs and feet, because they are all needed to work as a whole unit; each just serving different roles.  *

On the other side of the coin, many experts are of the opinion that the caste systems sets up predetermined inequalities based on things that are “unchangeable” for a person and should be completely abolished. 

 There are “classes” in every society.  There are those that are privileged from birth and like the Hindu caste system they follow in their fathers and grandfathers footsteps regarding occupation. Think here of some of the Ivy League doctors, lawyers, politicians etc.  There are others that are born in poverty and never see or even try to change their circumstances at birth.  Then there are those in the middle that do the middle man jobs and they often seem to follow in their parents footsteps having the similar, if not the same occupation.  Think here of farmers, factory workers, miners, etc.  Then, every society has their “outcasts”.  They may be considered outcast for many reasons, including race and religious reasons being near if not at the top of the list.  Think here of the slaves and burning of ‘witches’ etc.  And then there are the ones not satisfied to be “just what my parents were”.  They want to be more, to grow and enter into the next higher class of people.

Class systems seem to be a natural development of humans, even as they speak against it.  While it is certainly necessary to have each and every class of people for a people to live and thrive, it should not be something that you are stuck with for life.  Perhaps that is where the majority of the conflicting views on the caste system of Hinduism can be boiled down to.  Simply put, outsiders see their caste system as a negative thing.  The ones that are part of it seem to feel that it is as much a part of their daily life and religion as the Ten Commandments are a part of a Christian’s life. 

Certainly, injustices should be addressed by any society, especially injustices on the weak and vulnerable.   But in a case such as this, trying to change and integral part of any society or civilization runs the risk of destroying that civilization altogether.  The Hindus are adapting with times just as they have over the centuries past.  Outsiders really have no place imposing their opinions and views into something that takes lifetimes to learn.  The caste system definitely has its place in modern Hinduism and it is rapidly changing to fit the world around it.  People from different castes are serving in far different roles than in the past.  The “untouchables” are no longer called the untouchables but now are called Dalit and are protected by laws that do not allow them to be discriminated against.  Like most countries, India has its group of people that are treated badly.  It is nothing to be proud of nor continued, but fortunately, like America and many other countries, and unlike many others, India is working on moving their society forward and its religion, which is so much a part of their society, is moving forward with it.

*All quotes and references came from http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Caste_System2.htm

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is the point that I ended on simply because it was already running long.  There is absolutely no way  to do this topic justice in limited space.  What I mainly learned this week is that Hinduism is an extremely beautiful and complex system that does not separate religion from secular life.  It would take intense study to even begin to understand the finer points necessary to have a valid opinion on a topic this broad.  I did the best I could with what I feel is inadequate knowledge or understanding. The brief time we get to spend studying each individual religion is just not enough to grasp the intricacies that are involved in each religious system.

Until next week...

Gentle Breezes

Next Week's Topic:  Discuss the Buddhist concept of Nirvana.

Halloween in American Culture

This is a class writing assignment for my World Religions Online class.  Our Professors gives us a writing  topic for each week.  Guide lines are to write between two and three hundred words.  I went over a bit and hope he did not count against me.  :-)  Here is our topic question for this past week. --

Discuss the celebration of Halloween in American culture.  Does  it have religious significance?  Is it a night of evil or just fun?  What do you think?

Halloween is a perfect example that illustrates the melting pot we live in and love.  The beautiful patchwork of many cultures, bring their own and blend it as one called American.   Halloween originated in the early years of this age and evolved through time.  

It is first mentioned in America during the early 1800’s but it became more widely known and practiced when the potato famine in Ireland brought an influx of Irish and Scottish immigrants.   It was a day of fun and games with few, if any pranks, until the English observation of Guy Fawkes Day became more meshed with Halloween traditions. 

In the limited research that I performed, I found that fundamentalist Christian groups seem to be the main objectors of Halloween celebrations, in this country and others.  Their claims appear to be that the holiday is evil and celebrates evil intentions.  They seem to base this on the claims that the holiday has its historical roots in a pagan celebration.  Most of the holidays that we, as a country and as spiritual beings, celebrate have been so mixed, matched and meshed to the point of unrecognizability from their origins.   Whatever holiday ritual we use today to celebrate the major and some of the minor holidays, they are based, at least in part, on pagan rituals, especially if the term pagan is used broadly to encompass any ancient sect or religion.

To me, Halloween is a day to have fun and throw off the realities of the moment; remember how to play make believe.  It is a day that reminds us to not take life as we see it but to look beneath the surface.  It also reminds us not to take life so seriously. 

However we choose to celebrate Halloween, or not, as long as we harm no one and don’t try to impose our views on others in our life travels, we have a good start. 

Coming next week...
Discuss the "Caste System" in relation to modern Hinduism.  Does it have a place in modern society?  If so, explain.  Can people be expected to maintain their "place" or is it outdated and to be discarded?

Family---What makes a family?

Okay guys---Soapbox time!  I had someone say something to me yesterday that hurt me on their behalf and made me start thinking about something.  I know--those who know me well, are smiling, shaking your heads and saying hang on, cause here it comes!  :-)  Not sure how long this will be, cause you know when my fingers start talking, they don't always know when to shut up...So here goes--BTW--if you recognize yourself in this--I probably am not writing about you but I would pay attention if it strikes a nerve.

Family---What makes a family? Define Family.

Does blood make family?  No, not really.  If you really think about it, blood makes you relatives.  If you are connected to someone by blood, are they automatically your family?  No, because look at the parents that walk away from their kids at a very young age or give them up for adoption.  Are those people still family?  No, they are relatives.  The family is the ones that take those kids and raises them as their own.  The adoptive parents are the family.  Just because you share blood with someone does not make them your family.  Giving birth or making a child does not make you a parent.  It makes you capable of creating life, which is a given for every living thing. 

 What about the caretakers that physically or emotionally abuse kids or the elderly?  If those caretakers share blood with them, are they family? Or is family someone that they live with that cares for them lovingly and tenderly, whether they share blood or not?

 What if the people they live with "love" them as long as they conform to their belief system and their behavior types and that "love" is withdrawn when the child/person has independent thoughts and beliefs of their own?  Is that love?  Is that family?  Say you have a person live with you for several years, does that person become part of your family or are they just a very long staying guest?  Is that person left out of major family decisions because they not “blood-family”?  In a medical emergency, who gets to go back with a person or speak on the behalf of a person?  A blood-relative? or the person that they want with them, that loves them and that they love?  Who determines the care of an individual, the nearest blood relative, or the person that shares a bond of love? (If you don’t have a medical directive stating who determines your care in the event that you cannot speak for yourself, or you are under 18 years of age, guess what? Without legal orders stating otherwise,  your nearest BLOOD relative speaks for you, even if they don’t know what you want or perhaps even care enough to take your wants and needs into consideration.  They can speak based on what they want or believe.)

So really?  Who is family?  What is a family?  According to dictionary.com,  they  define family as primarily  blood related.  I copied and pasted their definition here.  

­­­­­­­­­­a basic social unit consisting of parents and their children, considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not: the traditional family.

a social unit consisting of one or more adults together with the children they care for: a single-parent family.

the children of one person or one couple collectively: We want a large family.

the spouse and children of one person: We're taking the family on vacation next week.

any group of persons closely related by blood, as parents, children, uncles, aunts, and cousins: to marry into a socially prominent family.

all those persons considered as descendants of a common progenitor.

Okay, you bring together a man and a woman (unrelated by blood-we hope-ha) and they get married.  They have children together.  They have a family.  Are the man and woman family?  They created children together.  Does that make them family?  They can get divorced—are they still family?  So if you don’t share blood, you can walk away and wha-la—no longer family?  But if you share blood, you can walk away and come back at will and expect to have just as much say so as if you never walked away?  Do you love everyone that you share blood with?  Are you required to pretend to love someone you share blood with? 

What about adopted kids?  They don’t share blood with you.  Legally they become part of your family, but are they really?  They don’t share your blood. 

What about a gay couple?  They may not be able to become legally family but they commit to each other, just like a man and woman.  They raise kids together.  Are they family?

What about your best friend that you have shared everything with for years and years?  They are not blood.  Are they family?

So technically, according to the dictionary definition, family is either blood related, or legally bound to another.  Okay, now what about love?  When does love make a difference?  Does it?  What if you have two siblings, you “love” them both because you “have” to, but you actually like one of them and don’t like the other one.  When did love become a requirement towards someone that you don’t even like?  Do you have “family” members that you “love” but really you can’t stand the sight of them?  If you were not blood related, would you even speak to them?  Would you choose to be part of their lives?  Do you have some “family” members that you would cry if they died, but only because they have been bound to you by blood for your entire life or not cry at all?  Is there someone out there that you love, not bound to you legally or by blood, that the very idea of them hurting or dying makes you unable to breathe?  Are they family? 

If you are bound by blood, does that give you the right to walk in and out of a person’s life as if it were a revolving door?  If you walk out on your child, can you just walk back in like nothing ever happened and expect love and respect that is “owed” to you because you are their parent?  Can you walk out of your parent’s life and walk back in at will and expect them to not have reservations about trusting you?  Now—a parent—some parents, will always love their child, regardless—but having said that, there are some parents that did not want the child in the first place and that child is lucky that they were not an abortion statistic, or they were a failed abortion.  But, after a few years, can that parent just walk back in and take over that child’s life as if they had never left them in the first place? Or on the other hand, after a few years, can you just dump that child you gave birth to and not care what happens to them?   What if that child has been adopted or simply cared for and is perfectly happy in their new life with their new “not blood” family?

Okay—I got off on a lot of questions and different aspects of “family” but really, put some thought into those questions.  How do YOU define family?

The words I said yesterday to the young lady I was talking to was, “Blood does not make family.  Hearts do.”  I woke up several times last night with the question running through my mind, “What truly makes a family?” 

There are a lot of people out there that have ex-in-laws and what about those of us who have a grandchild born without the parents being married.  The grand child is family because we share blood but what about the mother or father of the child?  Are they part of our “family” because we share a common blood relative?  (Now lucky for me, I happen to love the mother of my grandchild dearly but what about those who don’t?) 

Here is another one, not many people know that I was married a long time ago before I met and married my husband.  Since we shared no children, we are no longer required to communicate.  I still stay in touch with most of my ex-in-laws and care deeply about their well-being.  One in particular, still to this day, calls me Aunt Patty and will tell you real quick that I am his aunt and a very important part of his family.  And I might add, he is extremely protective when it comes to me and my kids.  We don’t share one tiny bit of blood, but he is and always will be part of my family.  His mother and I still consider ourselves sisters, even though we are technically not even sisters-in-law anymore.  No blood, no legal document—yet family we are, and family we will stay.

One of my sons became close to two boys when we moved here. Our families became close as a result.  They have been part of our lives for 10 years.  The boys are not as close as they once were, because they grew up and developed different lives.  Those boys still consider me like a second mom just as my son does their moms.  Are they family?  My answer would be yes.  They will be part of our lives until the end.  Maybe we don’t see each other on a daily basis, but I will never stop loving them, regardless to what they do or say or accomplish or not accomplish.  I love them without reservation and without conditions.  Their moms feel the same way about him.  I feel that way about the moms as well and know in my heart that they feel the same about me.

Would you lay down your life for someone? Maybe that is a definition of family… Would you lay down your life for someone that is not blood related?    It is so easy to say, “I would lay down my life for you.”  But really think about that statement.  Would you?  Would you, really?  (Now, I know we could go off on the tangent of heroes that lay down their life for strangers and all that but let’s stay with the idea of family.)  Would you stand in front of someone and knowingly let someone kill you if it meant that other person could continue to live?   I have several “blood” family that I would not give my life for, but I also know a very limited few “non-blood” people that I would die for willingly.  I know the majority of my “blood” relatives would tell me, “ha, you are on your own, I will not die for you”.  I know a few that would die for me without even having to think about it.  Is there anyone out there not related to me legally or by blood that would stand there and die for me?  I guess I can’t answer that for sure but, ‘probably not”, would be my answer.  Maybe one or two, but I cannot say that without a doubt. Does that mean I don’t have family outside of blood?  No, not really.  I have several people that love me without condition.

Perhaps that is part of the definition of family, loving someone unconditionally.  What conditions do you put on your love for others?  You may say, “I love unconditionally”, but do you?  What does that mean?  Do you love them for a while and when the novelty and newness wears off, do you not love them so much?  When you find out that they are as human as you are with all the faults and traits as every other person, do you love them less?  When you find out that their deep held beliefs don’t agree with yours, do you love them less? You might say, what does that have to do with family? Well, that is the family that comes into your life when you least expect it and without a blood connection. 

Do you love them less if you find out that, what?..lets say..you have loved someone for years and consider them part of your “family” and then you find out that they spent time in prison before you met them… say prison for something really bad,  but the person you have known all these years is nothing like what they were when they committed those acts.  Do you love them less, do you stop loving them altogether? 

Or how about, someone you have loved for years, and then you find out they are gay?  Do you love them less or stop loving them?  Do you judge them because you disagree with them?  Do you kick them out of your “family”?  What if they lived with you for years and although they are the same person today that they were yesterday, today you found out that they were gay?  They haven’t changed, your knowledge and your view of them changed. 

How about this one, one day the person you have loved for years, is revealed to be a former prostitute and addict?  She has lived a life with a secret past, do you love her less?  So your judgment of a person stands in the way of your love, what if that person is blood related to you?  Do you love them differently or are you less willing to turn your back on them because you share blood?  If you apply the above examples to a blood relative, you may say, “but I would have known those things about them if we were blood related”.  Not necessarily, they may have lost touch with your relatives for an extended period of time or as in the example of a gay person, you just may not have known.

Okay, here is another one, you have blood family that you have never met.  You speak to them on rare occasion on the phone or Facebook or not at all.  Do you love them?  Are they family?  I would say, technically, yes, you share blood or a legal bond with them.  But really?  No.  Is it okay to step into someone’s life that you share blood with and expect them to automatically love you and to automatically make room in their life for you? Do you automatically love them?  How is it that sharing blood is an automatic assumption of love? How is it an automatic assumption that you can just walk in and take the “title” that blood gave you as if it is your right?    

I guess there as many definitions of family as there are people but put some serious thought into it.  I have. I have thought about what constitutes family a whole lot in the past several months.   After saying those words yesterday, “Blood does not make family, the heart does” I put a lot more thought into it.  Mainly, because of the response I got back.  She said, ” apparently I don't have the heart for it..I guess I just have to live this way for good.. I won't have family, I won't be family.. fine”  A river of pain lies behind those words.  A life filled with pain, disillusionment, and abandonment.  Those words echoed through my dreams in a way that I can’t explain without telling her story; her story that is not mine to tell. 

As I asked myself all those questions, I looked closely into my heart for the answers, honest answers.  Some of the answers were not as picture perfect as I might wish for them to be.  But in doing so, I got to know and define my thoughts and beliefs on this topic quite thoroughly. 

So, I have decided that my definition of family is still exactly what I said, Blood does not make you family; your heart does.