Slavery accepted by Vedic culture?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Note: I have moved the posts about what the United Liberation Front of Assam has done in 1998, as it is completely irrelavant to this discussion.

 

The discussion should be focusing on slavery in ancient India, not what combing operations the government army did in the 20th century.

 

[Guest guest]

Basically you have removed all of my posts.

Some of which was relevant.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Another point we should understand is that slavery has existed in every culture of the world for thousands of years, it is not just a case of the whites against the blacks. The very word "slave" comes from "slav". Slaves originally referred to slavik people, not to blacks, Africans or anyone else. Slavery existed throughout europe, and the slaves were white europeans.

 

Many europeans also sold themselves into slavery by becoming endentured servants in exchange for free passage to America.

 

In Kali-yuga people will always try to exploit others, regardless of race, religion, or nationality. People will exploit with an almost spiritual vision of equality.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

If you are a registered member your posts will be dealt with in a gentler manner. Unfortunately many people post unrelated matter as guests, and it clutters the forums. The solution is to sign up as a registered member so we can identify your posts.

 

Your posts have been saved, so if you can show me exactly what in your posts provides evidence that the Assamese were an enslaved race 5,000 years ago, then please tell me so I can repost it.

 

Unfortunately, this is what your posts were about:

 

 

The current political situation in Assam is unstable with United Liberation of Asom (ULFA) fighting a low-intensity but wide-spread guerrilla warfare for independence from India...

 

 

[shvu]

 

 

African culture is almost all tamasic.What has been developed there?What literature has been produced?

 

 

With due respect, this is the kind of attitude that breeds racism.

 

Who has decided the set of rules that will determine which culture is tamasic and which isn't? During 09/11, there was a lot of help rendered by people of Western countries to people who were total strangers. On the other hand, during the earthquake fiasco of Gujarat, many Indians on the pretext of collecting donations, made a lot of money. Which culture was being tamasic here?

 

The native americans have produced no literature and have developed nothing. By your logic, they are also tamasic and deserve to be enslaved by "non-tamasic" cultures. Now it gets more interesting...what literature have you produced? What development have you made? If the answer is nothing, does this make you tamasic?

 

I understand, you have a dislike for Afro-americans. Now you are using statements by others to justify your attitude. If you will excuse me for saying this, such an attitude is not becoming of a devotee. Widening our perspective to see everyone on the same level, helps a lot.

 

Cheers

[shvu]

 

 

Basically you have removed all of my posts.Some of which was relevant.

 

 

If only a part of your posts was relevant, why did you post the rest of the stuff?

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Which culture was being tamasic here?

 

 

All cultures of the world are tamasic today to varying degrees. Those that kill each other by the thousands, chop off limbs of their neighbhors, burn people alive, engage in unregulated sexual activity like animals, live unclean lives, etc., are tamasic. According to the degree in which they engage in these activities, we can know their inherent natures. Every culture engages in these activities to some degree, but in some cultures it is more pronounced then in others. And in some places, it is the culture.

[Guest guest]

/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[Guest guest]

That is but one post.

Showing that these people are still enslaved at this point.

[Guest guest]

there is slavery today in all countries.

It is called prison.

In most for a percieved offense,or maybe political reasons a person is treated like a slave,made to work and cannot leave.

Some make a business out of it.

 

in vedic times there were no prisons,the offender would work off his 'debt to society'.

[karthik_v]

Theist prabhuji,

 

 

It's a conversation.Try to see it from that perspective.A free flowing conversation between teacher and students as they walk and chant japa.

 

 

I understand. I was curious to know the Sanskrit work's name from which this is quoted. Of course, I understand that in a conversation, the source is not always mentioned as is done in a paper.

 

 

African culture is almost all tamasic.What has been developed there?What literature has been produced?

 

 

There was a British Governor in India who remarked that the entire literary and spiritual collection of India in all these millennia is no match to a shelf of books in a British school library and that a British school student has more knowledge of science, maths and astronomy than what can be found in the so-called treasures of India. Only when we research into the treasures we can find what they contain. The civilizations of Africa and South America and many parts of Asia have been raped by the fanatical church and the mosque. A lot of it might have been lost. I have listened to some soul-searching music and a translation of their lyrics from Congo and from Romania [gypsies]. Well, these are the people, whom many might consider barbaric.

 

J N Das prabhuji,

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is making a statement about a particular culture. He is not speaking about other cultures in that conversation. Yet you conclue that Srila Prabhupada thought only Africans were meant to be slaves. Do you seriously not see your misunderstanding?

 

 

It is not my intention to win points here. The simple fact is that SP said that the Africans are meant to be slaves. I have asked for the entire context and it would be better if Theist prabhu or someone can provide it, instead of all this meaningless speculation.

 

If you have read Gone with the wind, you will know that many whites then thought that they treated the black slaves as their family members. That, in my opinion, was merely a condescending attitude. We can't decide what others aspire for and then claim that we have provided it. In GWTW, a terse conversation reveals what the reality was. When a neighbour tells Scarlett that the Yankees are saying that the black slave men can even marry a white woman, Scarlett screams in disbelief. What? They.....sleep with.....a white woman?

 

Frankly, I have not reached any conclusion about what SP meant. I am looking for the entire context, so that I can really know. I am not even sure that SP would have said that. I earnestly believe that he was a man above all such racism. He was a 70 year old man who cooked prasadam for 50-60 blacks, Puerto Ricans, whites, hippies and even washed the plates after they were gone. Many of them were just hippies. He initiated blacks as sannyasis. I am very skeptical that he would have made such a remark. ISKCON has had its share of useless fellows who became sannyasis and somebody with a racist mindset could have doctored these things. Or if it is a tape, might have selectively edited the content. Isn't there a controversy that BBT and GBC selectively edited SP's books?

 

 

Again, what I said is, "If they are unfortuante [bad karmic reactions] they would have evil kings such as the British or French."

 

 

Agreed. Sorry for not reading more carefully. Still, I don't understand in what way a European is/was superior to an African. How come karmic reactions don't apply to them and they end up as slaves?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Agreed. Sorry for not reading more carefully. Still, I don't understand in what way a European is/was superior to an African. How come karmic reactions don't apply to them and they end up as slaves?

 

 

Perhaps you should ask that to whoever made that statement. I dont see anyone making that statement in this thread.

 

Europeans have been slaves, as I pointed out in a previous message. Slavery has existed in every culture, and everyone, whether they be europeans, chinese, japanese, indians, or africans have been slaves at some point in history. That was their karmic reaction.

 

Since our modern history only documents the history of Kali yuga, we will not find a case where terrible exploitation has not occured.

 

Up till today, the Africans in Africa have not shown themselves qualified to rule themselves without destroying each other. This does not mean that they should be enslaved, but just that they will continue to suffer, either under their own rule or the rule of others. In an ideal situation, a saintly king would guide such people in their actions, not giving them absolute freedom to destroy each other. This is the meaning to "Africans are meant to be slaves." Prabhupada uses the word slave synonymously with Shudra, or laborer. He does not use it in the modern context.

 

Today in Africa there is no respect for human life, or life in general. That is a sure sign of an uncivilized culture. If they are educated, they can come to respect life, otherwise they will continue killing each other for nothing. It is really just a matter of one's inherent nature (gunas). We can see blacks in America who have become educated are much more civilized than those in Africa who have not.

 

There are other places in the world where similar disregard for human life exists. They equally need to become educated, or at least they need a Dhruva Maharaja to keep them in order. Seeing as there are no saintly kings, the only choice is education.

[theist]

 

With due respect, this is the kind of attitude that breeds racism.

 

>>.Nonsense.It is just an observation.<<<

 

Who has decided the set of rules that will determine which culture is tamasic and which isn't?

 

>>>Again, it's not rules made up by us that really determines anything.The modes of nature have certain characteristics.Gita ch. 14<<<

 

 

During 09/11, there was a lot of help rendered by people of Western countries to people who were total strangers. On the other hand, during the earthquake fiasco of Gujarat, many Indians on the pretext of collecting donations, made a lot of money. Which culture was being tamasic here?

 

>>>The modes are always mixed to varying degrees.We see this from individualy as well as collectively in the form of communities, nations, planets etc.<<<

 

The native americans have produced no literature and have developed nothing. By your logic, they are also tamasic and deserve to be enslaved by "non-tamasic" cultures.

 

I don't know much about them except they had many different types of tribes.Some more peaceful,some very warlike.Some were more nomadic then others etc.They did remain in very harsh living conditions which caused their lifespan to be extremely short.Perhaps they should have produced better shelter.Apparently they produced no literature, but they had oral traditions that caused them to respect the Great Spirit within everything, or so it is said.That is sattvik.Their foodstuff was largely based on animal flesh,which is tamasik.I believe a plant based diet is more in the mode of goodness.So some modes were dominant.You can analyze it for yourself if you want to.

 

Do I think they should be enslaved?

 

I imagine if one was to closely look at their social structure you would find some in group more inclined to inner pursuits,medicine men.Some administrative and able and willing to protect the tribe, the cheifs and braves.Some would be more inclined to trading amongst themselves and outside groups, wampam wallas,and others who would work to assist the above.These types are just different combinations of the three gunas.

 

On the whole one would have to say that the whites were more intelligent when it came to production.The white race is very good at these things but they usually don't know when to stp and maintain it, which I believe to be a sattvik defeciency.<<<

 

 

Now it gets more interesting...what literature have you produced? What development have you made? If the answer is nothing, does this make you tamasic?

 

>>>I have a strong tendancy to dream of things which I never do,that's tamasic.I have had my own businesses which is rajarsic I guess but tamas always keeps me from developing them;mixed tamas and rajas.I eat a mode of goodness diet.I also like elevating subjects and association.But I'm basically uneducated and lazy(tamasic)so I have produced no literature or anything else of finer merit.But to end on a positive note despite the predominace of tamas in my constitution,I am trying to develop and understanding of who I am in relation to God,sattvik.<<<

 

I understand, you have a dislike for Afro-americans. Now you are using statements by others to justify your attitude. If you will excuse me for saying this, such an attitude is not becoming of a devotee.

 

>>>Well that is a bit assumptive of you since I do not know you.From that I could assume you regularly read a lot of pop pyschology,but of course I don't really know that.

 

In any case it is true I am not a devotee.<<<

 

 

Widening our perspective to see everyone on the same level, helps a lot.

 

>>>Yes, and that means seeing everyone as spiritsoul, rather that trying to manufacture artifical equality on the basis of bodily designations.No two people are on the same level bodily.<<<<

 

Cheerio

 

[theist]

shvu:"I understand, you have a dislike for Afro-americans. Now you are using statements by others to justify your attitude. If you will excuse me for saying this, such an attitude is not becoming of a devotee."

 

shvu, I started this thread to explore the idea of "slavery" being a constituent of varnashram-dharma.karthik had suggested that Jesus Christ denounced varnashram and approved of slavery.That is incorrect as he was implying it.As I have NO desire to speak directly to karthik concerning Christ I choose an oblique approach to the subject.Hence this thread.

 

I do have a dislike for what most of Afro-american culture.In general I consider it to be a major drain on society and rather disgusting.I don't like Euro-american culture much either.But I will tell you I have no problem whatsoever in touching my head to the feet of a devotee in a black body, and have done so often and will again.

 

I started a thread not too long ago as an avenue for devotees to express themselves on this issue but not much response came.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Looking at vedic texts ie. four vedas and the upanishads it can be said that slavery didnt exist in vedic culture, because there are no rules that state how slaves should be bought or sold or who qualifies to be a slave and who doesnt. This is unlike other religions eg. islam, judaism which specifies rules for slavery.

[karthik_v]

J N Das prabhuji,

 

I agree with you that SP's intention must have been to bring the Africans to a level of higher knowledge so that they can guide themselves. In Lilamrta volume II, he does say [indirectly] that the white people [implied] have no understanding of God [because there are churches for homosexuals] and should take guidance from a tradition that knows who God is. So, here too he might have been talking of a THOSe Africans who end up in shanty town, without any recourse to education and who often resort to violence. Not that I ever thought that SP was a racist. Nevertheless, this thread did serve 1 purpose - it brought out some nice explanations from you.

 

Have you ever come across any mention of slavery in the 4 vedas or the 13 principal upanishads? I am curious because you implied that slavery existed in India during the vedic times. There is no mention of slavery in the ancient Tamil literature either. Here I am using the modern English definition of slavery, that is treating a human being as an expendable commodity that can be sold and the slave himself denied the right of independent existence. You would agree with me that the shudras were never denied ownership of land - in fact, they owned most of the land. Many of them, like the Azwars and Nayanmars, were even acaryas who produced the bulk of Hindu religious literature.

 

Theist prabhuji,

 

 

karthik had suggested that Jesus Christ denounced varnashram and approved of slavery.That is incorrect as he was implying it.As I have NO desire to speak directly to karthik concerning Christ I choose an oblique approach to the subject.

 

 

Dear prabhuji,

 

Another devotee originally suggested that Jesus supported slavery. I just produced the references from the Bible in support of it. I didn't initiate it in this thread or the other thread. Once I did use harsh words against Jesus and you threatened to quit. I apologized and requested you to return. I don't know if you read it. I have nothing but contempt for the church, which has been inimical to my religion and nation. I being a human, it sometimes gets expressed as a criticism of Jesus. That is not justified, but that shouldn't make you to avoid any discussion with me. If you point out, I will definitely apologize, if I had hurt you.

 

You will agree with me that it is alright to point out facts about Jesus and the Bible, though politely. Honestly, I find it strange that in ISKCON several folks deride Shiva as a demi-God, Sankara as a false propagandist but hail Jesus as the Son of the God, without batting an eyelid. I disagree with that and hence my opposition.

[theist]

karthik,

 

You did apologize and I respond accepting it and confessing my own offensive nature.Then later you posted some very vile name calling directly at Lord Jesus Christ,not the church.

 

I won't repeat what you said and it was deleted to spare the congregation from absorbing Vaisnava aparadha.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Have you ever come across any mention of slavery in the 4 vedas or the 13 principal upanishads? I am curious because you implied that slavery existed in India during the vedic times.

 

 

Off hand I can only recall Puranic statements or dharma-shastras (like Manu). But then it isn't exactly the slavery of modern times, but more like servanthood.

 

I remember on oneof the "Remembrances of Prabhupada" videos, a devotee telling about the first time Prabhupada came to Africa to visit one of the ISKCON temples.

 

Prabhupada's assistant couldn't locate any of prabhupada's clothes that he had washed; someone had stolen them. Then in the morning when Prabhupada was giving Bhagavatam class, all the African devotees came into the temple room, one wearing prabhupada's shirt, one wearing his hat, one wearing his sweater, etc.

[theist]

Were shudras paid for their labor,or just given the necessities of life in lieu of cash that would have been spent unwisely.

[karthik_v]

Theist prabhuji,

 

 

Were shudras paid for their labor,or just given the necessities of life in lieu of cash that would have been spent unwisely.

 

 

A very nice source for finding an answer would be the ancient Tamil literature, both devotional and social. Shudras were not only paid but they indeed owned agricultural land. They sustained the Brahmins, who rendered spiritual service. Most of the scholars who created the literary works hailed from the shudra communities. Brahmin scholars and saints were at best only 15% of the total in that category. The question of a person spending the money unwisely because he was born into a certain community doesn't even arise, shastrically speaking, as the varna is decided by guna alone and not birth in itself.

 

For the most part, the shudras were far more opulent than the Brahmins. Only after the Muslim invasion and the subsequent killing of the Brahmins and Kshatriyas, did the large scale decline in Hindu society start. This resulted in such despicable practices as untouchability and bonded labour. Even then, slavery [modern English definition] never existed in India. After the advent of the Muslims, a few renegade Brahmins on the payroll of the Mughals created their own versions of Manusmriti and Arthashastra [and of course Allah upanishad] and forcibly interpolated such Islamic tenets as slavery into them. Even then, they did fail miserably, as they ended up adopting the Persian words for slave tax. Imagine Chanakya Pandit or the original Manu using a mix of Sanskrit and modern Persian for writing their codes /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif Till the 17th century, education was made available to ALL varnas, shudras included. If somebody believes that shudras are just interested in eating, sleeping...[ESMD], then they must understand that such a belief has no foundation in the reality that existed in India before the advent of the Muslims and the likes of Saint, my left foot, Xavier. Also, one must remember that most of our saints have been from the shudra community.

 

I don't recall using vile language against Jesus or anybody for that matter.

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

Good point Karthikjee.

 

Instead of finding who said what and who did what, the question is whether the authentic scriptures allows "Slavery" (The word "slavery"as understood generally).

 

The answer is "NO".

 

In vedic scriptures Bhagvaan is the center and anything done (even according to vedic dharma) that deviates from this goal does not produce everlasting results. Such acts perish.

[Guest guest]

Kiräta-hüëändhra-pulinda-pulkaçä äbhéra-çumbhä yavanäù khasädayaù

 

What is the word that is being translated as slave here ? What is the source of the verse ? These are relevant questions to hold a sastric discussion.

 

Also, one has to understand to which varna does a slave belong ?

 

[Guest guest]

Should one have the freedom to be a slave ? -

[Guest guest]

Even the fact that great people support an idea does not make it bonafide. Srila Prabhupada condemns even mahajanas like Bhishma and Drona for supporting Duryodhana in his commentary to Bhagavad Gita. Some may argue that Bhishma supported it out of moral compulsions, but Srila Prabhupada bluntly says it is for financial considerations!!! Anyway, it is an example to prove from the works of Srila Prabhupada themselves that principles are greater than mere people. Even if Srila Prabhupada or Jesus support a concept like slavery or prostitution, it cannot be considered absolute or correct from a Vedantic stand point.

 

It is possible that slavery was part of Vedic culture. We see that Pandavas gamble themselves away and become slaves. But just because it was a practice during vedic times does not make it correct. One may even argue in favour of slavery citing the the social, economic, moral and personal benefits. But that would be at best a relative argument and cannot be considered absolute.

 

If the statements of nIti sAstrAs are not in line with the conclusions of VedAntA, these statements have to be rejected.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

If the statements of nIti sAstrAs are not in line with the conclusions of VedAntA, these statements have to be rejected.

 

 

The Niti-shastra and the Vedanta (Upanishads) speak on completely different topics and have very little to do with each other. It is like saying if my history text book isn't in line with my math text book, then we reject it. Math and history are two separate topics and we cant expect one to speak about the other.