Bhramins made up Krishna/Gita and did not exist in Vedic Times.

[txbengali 0]

Well I'm new here. I started a post in another forum about the vedas and the gita prohbiting alcohol, and it turned into a theological debate. I mentioned I was Bhramin and some guy (everyone on this board is desi and under 25) starting ranting how Bhramins are evil.

 

So the Subject of this thread is his basic belief.

--------------------------Yeah it's pretty clear to me that this guy's in denial. NO, the original Vedas DID NOT HAVE BRAMHINS, and the fact that you keep talking about this only shows how much of a prejudiced Brahmin you really are. You've got so much propaganda in here I don't even know where to begin.

 

For the record, Brahmins NEVER made the original Vedas. Most Brahmin scholars were too uptight about keeping their social stature the didn't even have the TIME to comprehend the originals. And yeah, I don't rule out the possibility of Brahmins creating Krishna [just like they created the rest of the .] to solidify their power.

 

The real heroes are those such as Buddha and Asoka, and Gupta, and the myriad of unknown sages, and rishies, and holy men that traverse well off the beaten path up the himalayan mountains with nothing but FOCUS alone, to achieve Nirvana. THOSE are the many MANY unknown scholars who deserve REAL credit. Not Krishna, or Ram, or Arjuna.

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

Above is an exerpt about him saying I'm in denial, etc, etc.

 

So basically if anyone agrees with his statement, unlike him, can you please site for me some references.

 

My reference to rebut his theory was the Rigveda which does tell about the 4 Varnas. His rebuttal was that the Bhramins added that to the Vedas and that they made up the Gita and Krishna to solidify their power.

 

Any input supporting or refuting this statement would great thanked. I'll assume unlike the other board, there are more aunties and uncles and less young adults and teenagers.

 

Thanks,

Rana

[maadhav 0]

you are free to think so, we do not mind.

we know who told gita and when.

 

if you do not like hinduism, do not bother hindus.

just practice your religion.

 

[txbengali 0]

Whoooa there. I am a Bengali Hindu, and Bhramin, the founder of my bloodline is one of the Writers of the Vedas. This is not a post about the valitity of Hinduism, just :

Was the Caste system created in the Proto-Vedic Culture or was it a later addition during Classical Hinduism (ie the time of the Gita and Mohabatrat)

[Sephiroth 0]

You want to know a funny thing, Maadhav?

 

When dealing with Christians, Muslims proclaimed in ORIGINAL Bible, Jesus was not God. When one asked where is this ORIGINAL Bible, the Muslims keeps quiet.

 

When dealing with Buddhists, Muslims proclaim that Gautama Buddha was messanger of God (like Muhammad) and in ORIGINAL Buddhist Sutras, Gautama Buddha had taught his students about God and how to approach him as Muhammad did. When asked where is this ORIGINAL sutra (for examination), they say it is lost.

 

When asked HOW do they know Gautama Buddha was a messanger if the Sutra is lost (no records or trace left)? They say it is revealed in Al Quran about pervious messangers. So basically, they claim something based on what written in their books and not in Buddhists'.

 

And when dealing with Hindus, same thing also. Sri krishna was a messanger approach - FAILED.

Muhammad mentioned in Hindusm - FAILED.

Muhammad is Kalki - FAILED.

Al Quran comes from Manu Smirti - FAILED ... hell, even they themselves claimed that Al Quran NEVER revealed to men before or have any origins from anything before.

 

So, you can recognize all this trade marks of a Muslim, right?

[txbengali 0]

I hope your not infering I'm a Muslim. This white thread across my chest would look awfully funny if I was.

 

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showthread.php?t=105366

 

Read this post started by me on another forum and I think you'll understand what I'm asking. Look at the post of "spacecowby" and "aiyun".

 

I just want to know if I'm wrong and those two are right. Any help would be appreacted, because if I'm wrong I'll be the first to admit it.

 

AND THIS IS NOT A MUSLIM COMING ON TO A HINDU BOARD, RATHER A YOUNG HINDU TRYING TO UNDERSTAND MORE

 

If you don't want to help me out thats fine, but please don't call me a muslim trying to attack Hindus. I know Krishna existed and I don't believe my caste (bhramins) wrote the Gita or the Vedas for purpose of power, but the hindus (i use the word loosely)...on the post I linked you too believe that Bhramins are to blame for everything which offends me.

[Sephiroth 0]

I'm referring to the topic at hand as Muslim-like-issue (remember, I said trade mark of Muslims, not a Muslim speaking). I didn't say you were a Muslim.

 

Frankly speaking ... (and I don't care if you feel offended), I couldn't give a damn whether you have a white thread around your chest or a rope around your neck. For me, actions speaks more than words and a person's birth had nothing to do with what he can do.

 

As for your friend, aiyun ... an advice - Don't entertain him in the future. Any person who can walk around claiming to be half-Brahmin, Half-Kyastria (whatever that means) is a fool. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

Spacecowboy ... that's your business. I ain't going to jump in the middle of two "village fools" talking about their caste.

 

AND THIS IS NOT A MUSLIM COMING ON TO A HINDU BOARD, RATHER A YOUNG HINDU TRYING TO UNDERSTAND MORE

 

What is there to understand? You're a Brahmin, as your parent and yourself as described. You should be happy doing whatever you doing, as a Brahmin should. What do you seek to understand?

 

And no, I for one do not blame Brahmins alone for anything which happened to Hindusm or India (or the freaking world for that matter). It happened because it meant to be. Now, is the question of what we should do, rather than debate on what had happened.

 

Hmmm ... I notice Indians like to look at the past more than they do the future. They like to justify theirs and their forefathers' past actions, as if by doing such, you will actually accomplish something.

 

Look in front when you walk ... that is what you tell your children. You want to wait for your children to look up and tell you to look in front when threading in life as well? Grow up, dudes.

[maadhav 0]

<< I just want to know if I'm wrong and those two are right. Any help would be appreacted, because if I'm wrong I'll be the first to admit it. >>

 

okay. i will share some info.

 

krishna in gita 4-1 says:

 

ima.m vivasvate yoga.m

proktavAnahamavyayam

vivasvAn manave prAha

manurixvAkave'bravit

 

then in gita 4-13 he says:

 

chAturvarNyam mayAsR^ishhTa.m

guNakarma vibhAgashaH..

 

no vedic aacharya or saint has douberte what is said in gita. so, why a hindu should make hiw own speculations?

 

however, it is unfortunate that for centuried the varnasrama system was malpracted by the Hindus. teh malprctice system is not hinduism at all. now, we need to practice dharma correctly as it is given in gita. could you help the hindus to agree to this please?

 

[txbengali 0]

I know In the Gita and in the Rigveda caste is defiend as your qualit, it the Veda it just gives characteristics, and the the Gita Krishna says he determines your caste based on your Karma and Guna, the caste system itself isn't my question, I understand it.

 

And as far as Spacecowboy goes, the agrument between us is he thinks that the Bhramins messed everthing up and that the Varnas (esp concerning Bhramins) were not created in the Vedic Age and was a later concoction of the Bhramins in the Classical Hinduism Age to sulidify their power. He actually abadons Varna as a device that Bhramans used to subjectgate the Suda(servile caste, i think i spelled it wrong)and to make themself better than everyone else.

 

What I am trying to undestand if his idea has merit, based on my beliefs and intrupatations of the Veda, Gitas and Puranas. Basically am I write or is he right about the founding of the Varnas? He has proved to me he is write he uses no evidence and when I put evidence forth he says the Bhramins made it up (the evidence). So he's not doign a good job conviencing. So I'm wanting to know from my elders or the more learned if his idea can be proven and to prove it to me so I can learn from my misunderstandings of the religion.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[Sephiroth 0]

What I am trying to undestand if his idea has merit, based on my beliefs and intrupatations of the Veda, Gitas and Puranas. Basically am I write or is he right about the founding of the Varnas?

 

Why don't you pick some of the Sri Krishna's actics from Mahabratha as your defense?

 

Take Sri krishna's friend - Upayam (or something) who was given a boon (by Sri Krishna) to receive water whenever he was thirsty.

 

One day, he was thristy and pray to Sri Krishna for some water. A lowly caste hunter appeared and offered some but he refused, not wanting to take water from a low caste.

 

When he sees Sri Krishna again, he scold Him for sending water by hand of a low caste and Sri krishna replied that He had thought Upayam had achieve wisdom enough so He had asked Indra to give him some Amiratham.

 

Indra didn't want to give at first but finally agreed if Sri Krishna could take a bet that he (Upayam) could take it from hands of a low caste. Sri Krishna agreed and send Amirtham in such way but Upayam had rejected immortality and made Sri Krishna lost His bet with Indra.

 

You can find a lot of examples of such from Mahabratha which you can use as defense.

 

God cannot change human ego, it is humans who must change their own egos. Caste is Ego problem.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your post.

 

I had a look at the link you gave and was appalled by the person who said "you didnt have to beleive the scriptures and stuff and follow them to still be a good hindu?".

 

I know of a few people who think like this and from what I see there is nothing other than their birth that allows them to be called Hindus. A person may 'accidentally' be a hindu if they were bought up in a way that follows the principals. But if people don't at least try to live a Hindu life and understand the religion then I don't think they deserve to be called Hindus. Just that they are born into a Hindu family.

 

{NO, the original Vedas DID NOT HAVE BRAMHINS, and the fact that you keep talking about this only shows how much of a prejudiced Brahmin you really are.}

 

I don't know what caste the original vedic rishis were but by most they are accepted as Brahmins, though at that time Brahmins were like a union and not a strict and exclusive as they later became. If you lived the life of a Brahmin you were a brahmin. When it became hereditary (this was after inter-marriage of Brahmin families after generations) thats when the problems came about. The later sages of the Upanishads were from different castes most being former Ksatriyas.

 

{and the myriad of unknown sages, and rishies, and holy men that traverse well off the beaten path up the himalayan mountains with nothing but FOCUS alone, to achieve Nirvana. THOSE are the many MANY unknown scholars who deserve REAL credit. Not Krishna, or Ram, or Arjuna.}

 

I understand what he is saying. There were many sages that have been forgotten or are often ignored even though they have made a huge contribution to Hinduism. For example the sage Patanjali wrote the yoga-sutras, without which we wouldn't have a record of raja-yoga for all times. This knowledge could've easily been lost.

 

{the Bhramins added that to the Vedas and that they made up the Gita and Krishna to solidify their power.}

 

This cannot be true as Krishna was very critical of caste-by-birth. He went againt what some brahmins said about caste being determined by birth and said it was determined by gunas, action, etc. Also if anyone 'wrote' the Gita it was sage Vyasa who was not a Brahmin, but the offspring of a Ksatriya and a fisherwoman.

 

[Guest guest]

you mentioned several times that you are a brahmin. firstly that is not for any one of us to decide, not you, not your family, not your surname, nothing. you're right in saying it is quality, which you obviously lack. unless your mindframe is that of a servant, you can't be a brahmin. unless you are ready to serve and tend to the sudra, you can't be a brahmin. we are all sudra's here, let's not elevate our status to such high levels. purify your mind and earn people's respect. serve God by serving His people and those in need. then you will be considered a brahmin - there's no need to yell it out on a loudspeaker, it impresses noone.

[txbengali 0]

Jimbo, I'll thank you not to post if you don't want to post on topic. Thank you, come again.

 

On the author of the Gita, I'm very enquisative and I don't just accept what people say without doing research. Came across this, about Sri Veda Vyasa.

 

He was the great grandson of the famous Brahmarishi, VasishTA and the grand son of the sage Shakthi and the son of the eminent sage ParAsarA; latter was blessed by VasishTA and PulasthyA and on account of their blessings, ParAsarA was endowed with the true knowledge of the Supreme Reality.

 

If his family is all sages, doesn't that make them all Bhramin? I don't mean by birth, but by the path they chose?

 

[maadhav 0]

if you want to get confused

you can do it in millions of ways

listening to every tom dick and harry.

 

we hindus choose to listen the the vedas and our scriptures and gita, and our aacharyas, and saints.

so just tell your friend that we choose that way,

and we are not interestd in his stories.

 

[Guest guest]

Even if the teacher desires the whole class coming first the same never happens ... it is not the teaching prowess of the teacher which comes into play but the willingness on the part of the student ... the inherent capability of a student which gets him the desired numbers.

 

Before the wisdom of Bhagvad Gita can be imparted to one ... the God ensures that the candidate is suitable and receptive to comprehend the inner meaning of the most complex sacred scripture ever written. Lord Krishna before imparting this wisdom to Arjuna ensures that he has burnt out his Karma totally and become pure similarly as we separate out the metal from the ore.

 

Apart from burning out the Karma one must also absolve himself of impure thoughts forever. As long as we continue invoking impure thoughts we can never raise ourselves to the matching frequency on which operated Lord Krishna. Purity of thoughts is an absolute necessity ... one cannot do away with it.

 

Purity of thoughts always and ever round-the-clock every moment of Life is a must. Only one who dwells in absolute purity of thought and has burnt out his Karma totally is a fit candidate to receive what Lord Krishna has to give. There is no other shortcut to obtain the wisdom of Bhagvad Gita.

 

One may be 90 years of age yet unable to grasp the inner meanings of the sacred texts. In contrast, one younger by many years may grasp the inner meanings more easily. Whoever wants to proceed on the Spiritual journey at any given moment of his Life can do so freely. However, the prime and sublime knowledge contained in the various sacred Scriptures of the World is not meant for the ordinary.

[maadhav 0]

dear guest 18,

 

praNam!

your post is very good.

 

i have a bit to say about your line:

 

<< However, the prime and sublime knowledge contained in the various sacred Scriptures of the World is not meant for the ordinary. >>

 

when krishna has created four varnas and asrhamans in order for all to be able to go to him, then all have equal access to read and live by gita. but one must not make his own interpretation. one needs a guru/guide who can tell him the message of gita. gurus usually come broma brahmana class who have the gunas and karma of brahmana.

 

krishna loves all, and therefore he gave gita to all.

now, if a father woh loves his children very much, want to write a message/advise to his children, he will not write it in a way that is difficult for the children to understand it. becaue, to do so will defeat his purpose of giving the message. therefore, we can conclude that krishna's message - gita - is actually in simple form to understand. most of it is actually simple to understand. some things are diccicult for some, becaue one's paradighm has been distorted.

 

so, instead of telling gita is most difficult to understand and thus discouraging them to read it, we need to tell that gita is easy -mostly- to understand, and a good guru can help when something is difficult to understand for one. but never doubt the message of gita, and never make your your concocted interpretation.

 

the message to people should be:

 

if you love your father - krishna

you love his message -gita.

read it every day.

ask your guru if something is hard to undestand.

live by gita, and

experience peace, prosperity, and god.

 

[Guest guest]

It's nonsense, spoken by a "Hindu" who blindly accepts the idea that Hinduism was BORN a racist religion.

 

It was not. Hinduism is not a static thing, it evolves through time, for better or worse. I don't believe the caste system was used for repression of others, or any such thing. I also believe there was mobility within the caste systems, and it did not restrict you frmo being a brahmin even if you weren't born one. I also don't believe that brahmins held all the power or any such thing.

 

Yet this is Kali Yuga, and there are many Brahmins, kshatriyas, and vaisyas now who are racist and have forgotten their spirituality. They look to the skin color, and hoard power over sudras, as if they have a right to such a thing.

 

Maybe Krishna existed, maybe all the gods exist, this "Hindu" who proclaims such trash is not intelligent or enlightened enough to say whether they did or did not.

 

It is not his place to place such criticisms when he is blind to truth and flails out looking for targets of his anger.

 

In other words, I do not think his ideas are of any value, as there is nothing substantial behind them.

[Guest guest]

rather it has alot to do with the topic. perhaps the sooner you understood the concept, the better you'd be on your little journey of discovery. best of luck.

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhavji,

 

 

Namaskar,

 

 

Thanks for reading the post. My post was in the context with the another forum where the arguments were made which I found meaningless.

 

Every Human Being has his limitations ... we are not supposed to question the limitations of a person. If it were within the control of an average person to change the value of his limitations everything in the society would change. All would not only become literate but we would enter a golden Era.

 

The prime reason why in Bhagavad Gita shloka X-3 Lord Krishna emphasizes on this fact that to know God and his existence ... we need to understand the cosmic structure from the angle of the various sacred scriptures. One thing must be borne in mind that until and unless we realize God the true phenomenon of the cosmic concept of Life would not become clear to us. To gain Self-Realization we need to understand and grasp the inner truths laid out in Bhagavad Gita without which all efforts would go in vain. Bhagavad Gita is not a document which is required to be preached to the masses ... every Human Being needs to assimilate and learn of the cosmic truth by his own efforts.

 

No Spiritual guru or a master can ever make us understand the principle behind the cosmic truth unless we put a foot forward and make every effort to understand the absolute truth. The Spiritual Master can only act as a guide ... a pillar of wisdom on our journey towards God realization.

 

As knowing the Sun we lose interest in the power of a candle, the knower of God, the Almighty Creator of the Cosmos ... comes to understand the whole creation from the angle of God. It is insignificant to argue whether Vishmavitra was Kshatriya or not rather than what he contributed to the mankind. Even for knowing Bhagvad Gita one had to rise to a certain mental stage and only then could one grasp the power of Bhagvad Gita. For having a complete view of New York one needs to go to the top of Empire state building ... one standing at a lower-level can only expect to have a lesser view.

 

[maadhav 0]

i understand your point.

 

<< Bhagavad Gita is not a document which is required to be preached to the masses ...>>

 

we do no forcibly preach anyone,

but when one wants to learn happily and willingly,

gita's messasge has to be preach explicitly or implicitely,

becaues it has all the truth about hinduism.

 

it is better to give credit to gita/krishna,

than not give credit, or give someone else the credit that actually goes to gita/krishna.

 

<< every Human Being needs to assimilate and learn of the cosmic truth by his own efforts. >>

 

sure, but we still can make effort to make people interested. if we do not tell thirsty people where the water is, then we would not be doing any good to them.

 

 

[Sephiroth 0]

I don't think he is here to discuss about the Gita or Sri Krishna.

 

I think he is here because someone bruised his ego (of being a Brahmin) and now, he want us to praise him for being a Brahmin (by implying it was another Brahmin - Sage Veda Vyasa) who wrote down Mahabratha.

 

But according to this website :

http://www.freeindia.org/biographies/sages/vedavyasa/

 

Sage Veda Vyasa's mother was a commoner - daughter of a man who was a fisherman and a ferryman who made a living catching fish and ferrying people across the river.

 

Just as God didn't look at Sage Veda Vyasa's family's Brahmin status when giving him the task of writing Mahabratha and Gita down, nor should Brahmins today pride themselves stupidily in their birth status.

[Guest guest]

Hari OM:

 

i am a Hindu, Brahmin, Indian and Tamilan and Proud of all the four, you should also have the same feeling first, none of our fore fathers had done any thing bad for us to feel ashamed or guilty.

 

Whether Vedas created Brahmins or Brahmins created Vedas? if no Varna was specified in Vedas how did brahmins came out in the first instance, a group of people gathered together some where declared they are Brahmins and started harassing other groups? and this same pattern is repeated again and again in every place of Bharat? highly unprobable.

 

Varna system was an inherent system of Manu Smiriti passed by Manu and received from Lord as is confirmed by Lord himself in Gita, and there were so many external guards (lingustic and others) incorporated so that these are not corrupted.

 

The main problem was that the earliest Indologist came to India after studying history of Greece, Rome, Arabia, Egypt etc., where one group of people took advantage of other groups and concluded that every where it is same and wrote Indian history as Brahmins harassed non-Brahmins , it may be true that a few cases must have existed as such, but should have been exception than the rule.

 

All the castes and sub-castes are proud about themselves (still) but it does not mean that they are against or hate others , because the concept of single family (Vasudeva Kudubam) is ingrained in all Hindus by means of stories.

 

The topic of Brahmins not allowing others to walk through their streets is high-lighted in many articles, but you can find mention of farmers not allowing Brahmins to walk through the fields , this practice is found still in rural tamilnadu , where old people say if a brahmin walks in the field, then all the plants get Vedanthic and will stop growing!!!!

 

different varnas had their customs, seperate beliefs and didn't intermingle with each other, but it is wrong to say that brahmins (or any group) messed up with Vedas or the Varna system for their own benefit.

 

The people of old age (even like 200 years ago) where not as materialistic as us, they were simple, satisified with normal means, were god-fearing/loving and dare not to break dhrama for any benefits (forgot about forging vedas). The irony is we (the materialistc people) had put our lenses while studying the history and assumed those people were also as petty minded like us that they do anything (lying, forgery, cheating, killing, etc.,) to achieve material benefits (which most of them belittled in their literature anyway)

 

Thanks,

 

Subham

[Guest guest]

Hey TXBengali (ARE YOU FROM BANGLADESH) whosoever you are,

 

The basic premises that Brahmins made up SriKrishna and Gita is wrong becauses:

 

1) SriKrishna himself appeared in a so called lower "shepherd" caste Yadav community;

2) Gita doesn't glorify Brahmins rather Kshatriya caste and exhorts them to perform their duty;

3) SriKrishna has favoured Bhaktiyoga as even more important than Gyanyoga in Gita (the Bhakti or devotion of lowly Gopis was more endearing to Krishna than superficial knowledge of Brahmin Udhdhava);

4) SriKrishna mentioned that each person according to his her prakriti performs tasks i.e. a Brahmin full of Tamasik nature is no good for priestly jobs,

5) Now where in Gita Brahmins are given undue importance and Srikishna has emphasised the importance of devotion or Bhaktimarg and surrender unto Him as the best way to spiritual upliftment.

 

These reasons are sufficient to prove that Brahmins have not been given undue importance in Gita.

 

Now coming to your premise that Krishna does'nt exist. my learned Brahmin friend if you don't believe that Sun doesn't exist it will have no effect of the health of the Sun. Being a Brahmin per Gita, you have been overtaken by Tamas which has become your prakriti and hence this ignorance and babbling.

 

SriKrishna and Gita graces those who have love and are ready for it. It seems that you are not yet ready for it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I dont understand why people are still fighting about caste in this century.What difference would it make if a person was a brahmin or a muslim. Have we truly ever tried to understand the meaning of these religious teachings?

one thing that no one can deny is that religion was not created by God, It was created here on earth by humans. There is no historical proof of what is written in the bible or the quran or the gita. It is only a matter of faith and what you want to believe. I totally agree that as modern Indians we must be practical and futuristic, instead of quarelling over past and losing focus from being good human beings in the process. But i also think that every person should be aware of his ancestory, it would only be wise if we read a lot more about history and religion in an objective and open manner and then decide for ourselves what our opinion or outlook is. We must remember that half knowledge can be very dangerous.

[Guest guest]

Hello brother. you are very eloquent and so far have responded magnificiently to the posts. If i may add my2 cents worth.

It matters not whether, Brahmins wrote or did not write the Vedas. The point is that they are inspirational to many. Ditto for the Gita. Krishna is widely worshipped.

 

Yet beyond all this, what relgion is supposed to do is to break down barriers and assist one to see the universal brotherhood of man through God and at a later stage see the universal God in man. It is hypocritical when one sings God's names and then curses his creation-man, jsut because he shares a different faith.

For those, who critique Islam, it is worth noting that no other religion has acheived the notion of brotherhood of Man like Islam.

[Guest guest]

Have any of u people thought atleast once that to end all these confusion it just takes one second for god to show his form to one and all and say this is what i am so dont fight within u?Y havent he did that?Anyone please give a rational answer?Y this hide and seek by so called gods.