Why no ksatriya prime-minister of India?

[veluthukaran 0]

from panditji to vajpayeeji, all bramhins,going against their dharma. is this right?

[maadhav 0]

they were brahmin by birth, not by guna and karma perhaps.

 

after independence, shudras, unqualified, were given political posts, and we are still suffering from it.

 

 

[veluthukaran 0]

i cannot reconcile your first comment. if you are bramhin you are bramhin. either you follow your dharma or you don't, in which case you would not be a good hindu. ksatriyas are the rulers, end of story.

[maadhav 0]

<< ksatriyas are the rulers, end of story. >>

 

it seems you are saying, "those who get teh position of a politician are kshatriyas."

 

in india unfortunatley there are some doctors who have got their degree by bribing. would you like to go to them for your medical problems?

would you call them doctors?

they got the doctors position.

 

 

[Guest guest]

in our tradition and history the ksatriyas were the kings. brahmins should follow their svadharma instead of trying to be ksatriyas. has nothing to do with politics. our leaders should be ksatriya. in this kali age, brahmins are overstepping their svadharma, as well as the sudras, etc...

 

i don;t understand what you said.

[maadhav 0]

please read gita to know

who is brahmana, kshatriya, viashya and shudra.

 

if you cannot accept the authority of gita then say so.

 

 

[veluthukaran 0]

can you refer me to this section of Gita which explains varnas. Also, is it possible for someone to be Bramhin by birth, but not by guna and karma? are you saying varna not passed down by birth?

[maadhav 0]

<< can you refer me to this section of Gita which explains varnas. >>

 

yes, but is it hard for you to find it in gita?

for a hindu it should not be hard.

what is the last time you read gita please?

do you read whole gita or just a verse or just a chapter?

 

<< Also, is it possible for someone to be Bramhin by birth, but not by guna and karma? >>

 

no. to assign a varna by birth is just a malpractice of varnasrama. then varnasrama become castism. it is unfortunate that the hindus malpracticed it for many centuries. it ought to stop, and is going away now.

 

<< are you saying varna not passed down by birth? >>

 

yes. ideally so.

 

in practice, one who is born in a perticular verna has more chance of developing guna and karnma of that varna.

thus we see that many good brahmanas' children do become good brahmanas. same for the other three varnas.

however, we have seen many saints coming from shudra families too.

 

chAturvarNyam maya shrushtam

guna karma vibhAgasaH -gita/krishna

 

gandhi was a vaishya, and took up politics (kshatriya karma). but he did not fight like a kshatriya.

non violence is not for kshatriyas.

 

chanaka was a brahmana, but took up kshatriya karma when he saw the dire need for the nation. he stayed on divine side.

 

drona was a brahmana, but took up kshatriya karma, but he stayed on demoniac side.

 

parasurama was a brahmana (of course an avatar)

but took up arms against the kshatriyas because

the khatriyas were malpracticing theri dharma.

 

a healthy society needs kshatriyas,

and so rama came and parasurama retired from killing the kshatriyas. rama showed how a king should live and rule.

no follower of gandhi who came to power ruled like rama.

 

a child of a doctor or engineer cannot be a doctor or engineer untill he/she studies the subject and gets a certificate from an authority. the certificate is a proof that he/she has developed gunas and karmans of the discipline of the procession. same for each varna.

 

 

[veluthukaran 0]

thanks, i read whole mahabharata,including gita, many years ago when i had time to read non-science textbooks. i was not religious hindu until college when i joined hindu students council chapter. i am explaining this to a buddhist which i should know more about. i will steal what you said.

 

<< are you saying varna not passed down by birth? >>

 

yes. ideally so.

 

yes maadav, if we can convince muslims in india of this as well as other sects we can make our case stronger. this is by far your best response to any of my questions. if you stick to truth o fhinduism then you need not bash islam, you only make them not want to listen to you.

http://krishna.org/ctfote/varnash.html

 

Question: why then could people not see Karna was ksatriya given his gunas and karma would undoubtedly say so? WHy he had to live life as sutaputra?

[maadhav 0]

<< if you stick to truth o fhinduism then you need not bash islam, you only make them not want to listen to you. >>

 

they way to make them listen is not gandhian way.

the way is firm reques to them that:

 

- their ancestors were hindus who were forcibley converted to islam by muslim invaders. so, then must give up islam if htey want to live in bharat.

 

- bharat is vedic land, not a muslim land. islam has invaded there and so it must go out. either quite islam or quit bhart. koran is not compatible with gita.

 

- if they do not listen to this, then economically boycott them. this is a very powerful weapon and is also non violent.

 

- conduct large scale 'vapas hindu bano" yatra, where the muslims are respectfully invited to come and give up islam.

 

- etc.

 

<< Question: why then could people not see Karna was ksatriya given his gunas and karma would undoubtedly say so? >>

 

karna was a kshatriya by birth as well as by guna/karma.

duryodhana, even though of asuric mentality, recognized karna and made him a king (to have a strong riend to kill arjun.) arjun unfortunately insulted karna and declred him as shudra. thus the soceity in general treated karna as a suta putra. that was wrong. krishna neer insultd karna.

the fault of karna was that he stuck to teh asura side.

he values his friendship more that a right party. even bhishma also did that mistake. eventlyally they were killed.

 

kumbhakarna, the elder brother of ravana was a good guy.

he really scolded ravana for kidnaping sita and making hostility with rama. still, he decided to fight for ravana out of love for brother. vibhishan however, decided to be in the side or rama. he got the kingdom of lanka after ravana was killed.

 

<< WHy he had to live life as sutaputra? >>

 

the society in general treated him as a sutaputra.

that was malpractice of hinduism (the varnasrama).

he lived like a king after he was made a king by duryodhan.

karna's life was very tragic.

 

sorry i did not answer your questions before.

my effort is to get islam out of the vedc land, and so i spend most of my time for that. but woudl answer questions if asked to learn in a friendly manner. my answers to anti hindus come in different content and tone than to friendly hindus. i am sure you understnd why.

 

please read gita every day, even a little, but read regularly.

 

[xxvvii 0]

As hindus, you should research the inseparable relationship of Hinduism with India. It's stupid to abandoning one for the benefit of the other.

 

As indians, you should keep the concept of "nation" in your mind, otherwise I have to intervene in your admin.. In case of necessity I will even take up "blood & iron" to remind you forgetful people who is guarding this land.

 

What I do is maintaining freewill, equity, peace, & authority in order to acquire profit from competition. If your attempts discord with it, they can't succeed. For ex., the possibility is 0% for me to join in a religious org. just bcos the possibility is 0% for me to give up equity & make the relationship more complex than employment so as to cripple my authority.

 

You said you don't like dealing. That's not true. Not only you do like it, but you cunning people attempt to get too much with a little payment.

[Guest guest]

<snipped islam in india>

 

Only wanted to clarify a couple of things as regards Karna and the Mahabharata...

 

<< Question: why then could people not see Karna was ksatriya given his gunas and karma would undoubtedly say so? >>

 

<karna was a kshatriya by birth as well as by guna/karma.

duryodhana, even though of asuric mentality, recognized karna and made him a king (to have a strong riend to kill arjun.) arjun unfortunately insulted karna and declred him as shudra. thus the soceity in general treated karna as a suta putra. that was wrong.>

 

As I know the story, Arjun did not insult Karna, he was ready to fight. It was Kripa and Drona that intervened and told Karna he had no standing to challenge and fight Arjun as he was not of equal standing. Also note it was in an event specifically held for the royal princes to display display their skill, and kshatriya guna ot no it was a little arrogant of him.

 

<the fault of karna was that he stuck to teh asura side.

he values his friendship more that a right party. even bhishma also did that mistake. eventlyally they were killed.>

 

Bhisma did not stick to Duryodana out of friendship. He was way too learned and wise for that simple a mistake... he had taken a vow to protect the throne of Hastinapur no matter what, and he was forced to side with Duryodhana. Drona did it because he had eaten the food and enjoyed the comforts provided by Bhshma and therefore Hastinapur. But I guess the message is the same... righteousness is above all - friendship, gratitude, etc.

 

<< WHy he had to live life as sutaputra? >>

 

<the society in general treated him as a sutaputra.

that was malpractice of hinduism (the varnasrama).>

 

I wouldnt somply put this down to the malpractice... he was not without his arrogance, ego, deceit and assosciation with the asuraic side for gain (of position, wealth, whatever). That is sudra guna. Contrast this with Yudhistra's saying 5 villages will do for him just before the Kurukshetra incident.

 

karthik

 

[maadhav 0]

thanks.

 

we are not in disagreement.

 

BTW, are you jawan karthik?

if so, please pick a good username here, i suggest.