I'm squaring off against a guy who is claiming that the Hindu scriptures are oppressive and offensive and inherently racist. He brought forth these arguments:
The Taittriya Brahman is responsible for the following explanation:
i.2.6.7.—"The Brahmana caste is sprung from the gods; the Shudras from the Asuras."
iii. 2.3.9.—"This Shudra has sprung from non-existence.
According to the Kathaka Samhita (xxxi.2) and the Maitrayani Samhita(iv.1.3;i.8.3)
"A shudra should not be allowed to milk the cow whose milk is used for Agnihotra."
II. The Satapatha Brahmana (iii.1.1.10), the Maitrayani Samita (vii.l.l.6) and also the Panchavirnsa Brahmana (vi.l.ll) say:
"The Shudra must not be spoken to when performing a sacrifice and a Shudra must not be present when a sacrifice is being performed.":
9. Not every one may enter it, but only a Brahman, or a Râganya, or a Vaisya, for these are able to sacrifice.
3:1:1:1010. Let him not commune with every one; for he who is consecrated draws nigh to the gods, and becomes one of the deities. Now the gods do not commune with every one, but only with a Brahman, or a. Râganya, or a Vaisya; for these are able to sacrifice. Should there be occasion for him to converse with a Sûdra, let him say to one of those, 'Tell this one so and so! tell this one so and so!'
p. 5
This is the rule of conduct for the consecrated in such a case.
III. The Satapatha Brahmana (xiv.l.31) and the Kathaka Samhita (xi.lO) further provide that :
"The Shudra must not be admitted to Soma drink."
The Aitareya Brahmana (vii.29.4) and the Panchavirnsa Brahmana (vi.l.ll) reached the culminating point when they say:
"Shudra is a servant of another (and cannot be anything else)."
I was pretty dismayed by all this, being a believer that Hinduism is a tolerant tradition. I still believe it is, obviously that won't change, but I would like to know if there is a way to counter his arguments above. Is there a way to show that he has taken the texts out of context? Or perhaps if it was mistranslated? Much of these arguments I know have been taken from Dr. Ambedkar's works. But still, his thrust is that this is the reason for brahminism and caste based oppression in India, and that no matter how much the Mahabharat/Gita or any other texts tried to rectify this mess, that the inequality of society continue because of this. I would like to hope that the literal/poetic/metaphorical/allegorical meanings of these texts have been taken out of context.
Can anyone please help me? Thanks in advance.
