casteism Tackling caste issues

[TejS]

1 hour ago, Preeet said:

Its so obvious that Sri Krishna ji came  in dwapur yuga, and the veda ji is from sat yug. How can it be possible to write about future avatars in the veda jis  when they are before dwapur yug? Its humorous when someone wants to be respected while laughing at others.

I guess you didn't understand what I found laughable. I wasn't laughing at the avatar himself or that he came later on in the future, I'm laughing at the teaching he departs to people in the Bhagavad Geeta. His emphasis on Arjuna attaining mukti/moksha on the basis of karma yoga, and his karma being the duties of his caste is laughable. It enforces one's caste and goes against the original Rig Veda that has no defined caste system and against Sikhi too. Not to mention that it is inconsistent with warranting reincarnation and demigod worship which is not found within the original Veda and contradicts its teachings.

[Preeet]

28 minutes ago, TejS said:

 I guess you didn't understand what I found laughable. I wasn't laughing at the avatar himself or that he came later on in the future, I'm laughing at the teaching he departs to people in the Bhagavad Geeta. His emphasis on Arjuna attaining mukti/moksha on the basis of karma yoga, and his karma being the duties of his caste is laughable. It enforces one's caste and goes against the original Rig Veda that has no defined caste system and against Sikhi too. Not to mention that it is inconsistent with warranting reincarnation and demigod worship which is not found within the original Veda and contradicts its teachings.

His emphasis blah blah blah. You know that most of us all have different interpretations of the gita ji or even sri gurbani ji according to our own avastha? So does the veda ji say theres no caste system? Or do they say simply not mention caste? Honestly speaking, I dont believe in the caste system either, but tribes are real. Remember that Sri Vishnu ji IS a vedic god, he is part of their trinity, he IS of importance to them now, HIS hukam is VEDIC hukam. 

[TejS]

1 hour ago, Preeet said:

His emphasis blah blah blah. You know that most of us all have different interpretations of the gita ji or even sri gurbani ji according to our own avastha? So does the veda ji say theres no caste system? Or do they say simply not mention caste? Honestly speaking, I dont believe in the caste system either, but tribes are real. Remember that Sri Vishnu ji IS a vedic god, he is part of their trinity, he IS of importance to them now, HIS hukam is VEDIC hukam. 

You just called my interpretation "blah blah blah", yet go on to telling me to respect other's views, now that's laughable. I don't know how naive does one have to be to not be able to see that the caste system arose out of racial tension in India. The Vedas were written in Punjab, a purely Indo-Aryan society. When scholarship moved eastwards to Uttar Pradesh, after the fall of the Kuru Kingdom, the Mahabharata and the encompassed Gita was written with new rules drawn to counter the spread of Buddhism such as the incorporation of reincarnation and impose segregation among the racially different people. 

Being respectful is one thing, being ignorant is another. 

A tribe is very different from caste. Not sure why you are equating the two.

And no there's no mention of caste in Rig Veda, because there was no division among the people. Everyone was equal. The only common enemy was the Dasyu, the idol worshippers, which is also another act your beloved Krishna advocates in the Gita going against the Veda, therefore going against the Hindu claim of having an "eternal way".

[Preeet]

19 minutes ago, TejS said:

You just called my interpretation "blah blah blah", yet go on to telling me to respect other's views, now that's laughable. I don't know how naive does one have to be to not be able to see that the caste system arose out of racial tension in India. The Vedas were written in Punjab, a purely Indo-Aryan society. When scholarship moved eastwards to Uttar Pradesh, after the fall of the Kuru Kingdom, the Mahabharata and the encompassed Gita was written with new rules drawn to counter the spread of Buddhism such as the incorporation of reincarnation and impose segregation among the racially different people. 

Being respectful is one thing, being ignorant is another. 

A tribe is very different from caste. Not sure why you are equating the two.

And no there's no mention of caste in Rig Veda, because there was no division among the people. Everyone was equal. The only common enemy was the Dasyu, the idol worshippers, which is also another act your beloved Krishna advocates in the Gita going against the Veda, therefore going against the Hindu claim of having an "eternal way".

& your emphasis is fairly respectable right? The vedas were most likely distributed in Punjab region, but they came from Sri Brahma Devta ji. A jaat is a group of people, likewise a tribe/status. Can you give me a reference please, where it says Dasyus were enemies? Dasyus literally mean servant of whomever. Sri Vishnu Devta ji is a Vedic god, his hukam is always Vedic. So what if hindus follow the bhakti route now, they still respect their veda jis. The hare krsna mantra is for them, similar to bhakti jaap. So how is paying respects to their vedic god defying vedism. Just like how our duty is to do naam simran, but we pay our respects to heros of current generation sikhs as well. 

[TejS]

1 hour ago, Preeet said:

& your emphasis is fairly respectable right? The vedas were most likely distributed in Punjab region, but they came from Sri Brahma Devta ji. A jaat is a group of people, likewise a tribe/status. Can you give me a reference please, where it says Dasyus were enemies? Dasyus literally mean servant of whomever. When Sri Vishnu Devta ji is a Vedic god, his hukam is always Vedic. 

My emphasis? You mean Krishna's emphasis on caste?

Jaat stems from "ajaat", meaning casteless, someone who the Brahmins removed from the caste system due to them not abiding by Hindu practices. Now that same Jaat tribe has become a caste in Sikhism, where it serves the role of a "Brahmin" dictating who can step into a Gurudwara and who cannot. They yield themselves as the saviors, upholders of Sikhism, which is plainly laughable.

The dasyu were enemies, the Aryan obliterated them: http://vedic-age.blogspot.com/2009/11/conflicts-of-aryans.html

Vishnu is what? Nothing but a minor quality of a limitless God, Akal Purakh, who the Hindus have personified into a demigod.

God is the creator of all. “He created air, water, fire, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva” (Guru Granth Sahib, 504).

“He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, who act according to His Will” (Guru Granth Sahib, 948).

Not sure why you are emphasizing his minor attribute. This is the problem with Hindus, they see through parts, they lack the mental strength to see the whole. Let's not err like them as Sikhs.

[Preeet]

16 minutes ago, TejS said:

My emphasis? You mean Krishna's emphasis on caste?

 Jaat stems from "ajaat", meaning casteless, someone who the Brahmins removed from the caste system due to them not abiding by Hindu practices. Now that same Jaat tribe has become a caste in Sikhism, where it serves the role of a "Brahmin" dictating who can step into a Gurudwara and who cannot. They yield themselves as the saviors, upholders of Sikhism, which is plainly laughable.

The dasyu were enemies, the Aryan obliterated them: http://vedic-age.blogspot.com/2009/11/conflicts-of-aryans.html

Vishnu is what? Nothing but a minor quality of a limitless God, Akal Purakh, who the Hindus have personified into a demigod.

God is the creator of all. “He created air, water, fire, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva” (Guru Granth Sahib, 504).

 “He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, who act according to His Will” (Guru Granth Sahib, 948).

Not sure why you are emphasizing his minor attribute. This is the problem with Hindus, they see through parts, they lack the mental strength to see the whole. Let's not err like them as Sikhs.

I consider it as your emphasis since you believe in it. It would be hard to say what Sri Krishna ji's emphasis is cuz neither of us are him. Thank you for the reference regarding dasyus. Exactly what I thought. He's a Vedic God, and I agree that all forms came from Sri Parabrahman ji. I was emphasizing his attribute since his avatar kept being mentioned.

[TejS]

1 hour ago, Preeet said:

I consider it as your emphasis since you believe in it. It would be hard to say what Sri Krishna ji's emphasis is cuz neither of us are him. Thank you for the reference regarding dasyus. Exactly what I thought. He's a Vedic God, and I agree that all forms came from Sri Parabrahman ji. I was emphasizing his attribute since his avatar kept being mentioned.

Krishna goes on to say that Arjuna can attain moksha through karma yoga - the fulfilling of his caste's duty to fight and kill. How is that my emphasis, or interpretation? It's written literally in the Gita. 

What exactly did you think? The Dasyus were enemies because they worshipped phallic idols. You said they were servants.

Vishnu  doesn't even exist as a separate entity, it's just a needless personification of God's nature created for those lacking in intelligence.